Alan Honarmand v. J.C. Penney, No. 11-1614 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil Case - employment discrimination. District court's finding that counsel had authority to settle case was not clearly erroneous. Judgment is affirmed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 11-1614 ___________ Alan Honarmand, Appellant, v. J. C. Penney, Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Eastern * District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: October 21, 2011 Filed: October 26, 2011 ___________ Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Alan Honarmand appeals the district court s1 orders dismissing his employment-discrimination action as settled, and denying his motion to reconsider based on his claim that his attorney settled the case without authority. Following careful review, we conclude the district court s finding that Honarmand s attorney had authority to settle the case was not clearly erroneous. See Mueller v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 143 F.3d 414, 415-16 (8th Cir. 1998) (holding that court s factual findings were not clearly erroneous in light of credibility determinations to which appellate 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. court deferred, evidence in record supporting court s findings, and reasonable inferences drawn by court from evidence); see also Harris v. Ark. State Highway & Transp. Dep t, 437 F.3d 749, 750-51 (8th Cir. 2006) (party who denies that attorney was authorized to enter into settlement bears heavy burden to prove that authorization was not given; express authority can be created by, inter alia, written words of principal which cause agent to believe that principal desires him to act in particular manner). Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
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.
