KENNETH GUICE V. JAMES EMERSON, No. 14-16004 (9th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED DEC 21 2016 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KENNETH W. GUICE, No. 14-16004 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 4:13-cv-02250-SBA v. MEMORANDUM* JAMES L. EMERSON, a natural person; et al., Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Saundra B. Armstrong, District Judge, Presiding Submitted December 14, 2016 ** Before: WALLACE, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges. Kenneth W. Guice appeals the district court’s summary judgment in his diversity action alleging fraud related to a real estate transaction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). evidentiary rulings made in the context of summary judgment. Fonseca v. Sysco Food Serv., Inc., 374 F.3d 840, 845 (9th Cir. 2004). We affirm. The district court did not abuse its discretion in deciding defendants’ motion for summary judgment without holding a hearing because Guice was provided a sufficient opportunity to oppose defendants’ motion and to raise any evidentiary objections in his opposition brief. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b). We do not consider Guice’s contentions that the district court erred in relying on both the affidavit filed in support of defendants’ motion for summary judgment and the attached exhibits because Guice waived these evidentiary arguments by raising them for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (we will not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal except to prevent manifest injustice); see also Davis v. HSBC Bank Nev., N.A., 691 F.3d 1152, 1161 (9th Cir. 2012) (failure to object to authenticity of document before district court waives issue on appeal); Pfingston v. Ronan Eng’g Co., 284 F.3d 999, 1003-04 (9th Cir. 2002) (to preserve hearsay objection a party “must either move to strike the affidavit or otherwise lodge an objection with the district court”). Therefore, we affirm the judgment. AFFIRMED. 2 14-16004
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
