Unpublished Disposition, 888 F.2d 1394 (9th Cir. 1989)Annotate this Case
Adam BENAVIDES, Plaintiff-Appellantv.CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-Appellee
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Oct. 6, 1989.Decided Nov. 6, 1989.
Before HUG, FARRIS and REINHARDT, Circuit Judges.
The judgment is affirmed. We have reviewed the thorough findings of fact made by the district court and conclude that they are not clearly erroneous. Moreover, in its memorandum and order the district court applied the correct legal principles and standards. See, Fadhl v. City and County of San Francisco, 741 F.2d 1163 (1984) and Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 109 S. Ct. 1775 (plurality), 1795 (White, J., concurring), 1796 (O'Connor, J., concurring) (1989).
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3