DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., No. 90-56009

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtBefore SCHROEDER, LEAVY and FERNANDEZ; LEAVY
Citation957 F.2d 655
Docket NumberNo. 90-56009
Decision Date19 February 1992
Parties121 Lab.Cas. P 10,008, 7 IER Cases 304 John DeSOTO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. YELLOW FREIGHT SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

Page 655

957 F.2d 655
121 Lab.Cas. P 10,008, 7 IER Cases 304
John DeSOTO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
YELLOW FREIGHT SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 90-56009.
United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Oct. 7, 1991.
Decided Feb. 19, 1992.

Page 656

Robert D. Newman, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

John C. Russell, Russell, Hancock & Jeffries, Pasadena, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

Before SCHROEDER, LEAVY and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

FACTS

LEAVY, Circuit Judge:

John DeSoto brought this action against his employer, Yellow Freight Systems, Inc. (Yellow Freight), alleging that he was wrongfully terminated because he refused to violate the law. The facts are stated in our earlier decision in this case, DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., 820 F.2d 1434, 1435-36 (9th Cir.1987) (DeSoto I), vacated, 486 U.S. 1050, 108 S.Ct. 2813, 100 L.Ed.2d 914 (1988), on remand, 851 F.2d 1207 (9th Cir.), superceded, 861 F.2d 536 (9th Cir.1988). A summary follows.

DeSoto was employed as a heavy duty pickup and delivery driver at Yellow Freight's terminal in Los Angeles, California. On March 7, 1984, DeSoto was assigned a trailer, No. 19563, which he thought he could not operate legally because it had expired registration papers for Illinois and an expired prorated vehicle tag for California. Despite being given a letter from Yellow Freight stating that it accepted complete responsibility for the lack of registration, DeSoto refused to deliver a load in the trailer. Yellow Freight terminated him. An arbitration committee sustained DeSoto's discharge under the collective bargaining agreement.

DeSoto filed an action against Yellow Freight in the Superior Court of the State of California, alleging wrongful discharge. He also petitioned to vacate, under section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 185, the arbitration committee's decision that sustained his discharge. The case was removed to federal court, where summary judgment was granted in favor of DeSoto on both counts. Yellow Freight appealed.

We reversed. DeSoto, 820 F.2d 1434. First, we found that DeSoto's section 301 claim was meritless. We also decided that California's wrongful discharge law was pre-empted by federal labor law, specifically by section 301. Id. at 1436-37. Finally, we decided the wrongful discharge claim failed because DeSoto was mistaken in his belief that it would be illegal to drive the trailer:

Page 657

Under an agreement between the state of Illinois and the state of California, there was a grace period which extended until May 1984, during which the California prorate sticker did not have to be displayed in the truck. Directive, California Department of Motor Vehicles, Jan. 4, 1984, R. Hagan, Chief, Registration & Investigative Services (120 day grace period before Illinois commercial vehicles are required to display indicia of registration). Unquestionably, DeSoto thought he was doing the right thing in refusing to take the trailer out. Unfortunately for him, he was mistaken. He was not acting in defense of a public policy of the state of California, but incorrectly asserting his own interpretation of the law.

Id. at 1438.

The Supreme Court granted DeSoto's petition for certiorari, 1 vacated our decision, and remanded for further consideration in light of Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399, 108 S.Ct. 1877, 100 L.Ed.2d 410 (1988), which held that section 301 does not pre-empt state claims where issues may be decided without reference to a collective bargaining agreement. DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., 486 U.S. 1050, 108 S.Ct. 2813, 100 L.Ed.2d 914 (1988). We in turn remanded to the district court for further proceedings on the state law claim and directed the district court to decide whether pendent jurisdiction should still be exercised. DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Systems, Inc., 861 F.2d 536 (9th Cir.1988).

The district court retained jurisdiction. DeSoto sought leave to file an amended complaint. The district court denied the motion on the ground that amendment would be futile. Yellow Freight moved for summary judgment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Yellow Freight.

On appeal, DeSoto argues that: (1) Yellow Freight wrongfully discharged him for his refusal to violate the California Motor Vehicle Code and the International Registration Plan and (2) he should have been allowed to amend his complaint to assert a claim for wrongful discharge based on his suspicion that it would have violated California law to operate the trailer.

DISCUSSION

Whether the District Court Properly Granted Summary Judgment

in Favor of Yellow Freight

Yellow Freight argues that our decision in DeSoto I is binding on whether operation of the trailer on March 7, 1984, was legal, because of the law of the case doctrine. We need not decide whether the doctrine applies....

To continue reading

Request your trial
1274 practice notes
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 20-CV-1290 JLS (WVG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • March 29, 2021
    ...no modified contention "consistent with the challenged pleading ... [will] cure the deficiency." DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ).Defendants seek to have......
  • Neighborhood Mkt. Ass'n, Inc. v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 20-CV-1124 JLS (WVG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • March 29, 2021
    ...no modified contention "consistent with the challenged pleading ... [will] cure the deficiency." DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ).Defendant seeks to have......
  • Crossley v. California, Case No.: 20-cv-0284-GPC-JLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • August 17, 2020
    ...of other facts consistent with the challenged pleading could not possibly cure the deficiency.’ " DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ). In other words, where......
  • Dunakin v. Quigley, CASE NO. C14-0567JLR
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District of Washington)
    • April 10, 2015
    ...only denied when it is clear that the deficiencies of the complaint cannot be cured by amendment. See DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) ("A district court does not err in denying leave to amend where the amendment would be futile."). It is not clear that......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1274 cases
  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 20-CV-1290 JLS (WVG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • March 29, 2021
    ...no modified contention "consistent with the challenged pleading ... [will] cure the deficiency." DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ).Defendants seek to have......
  • Neighborhood Mkt. Ass'n, Inc. v. Cnty. of San Diego, Case No.: 20-CV-1124 JLS (WVG)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • March 29, 2021
    ...no modified contention "consistent with the challenged pleading ... [will] cure the deficiency." DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ).Defendant seeks to have......
  • Crossley v. California, Case No.: 20-cv-0284-GPC-JLB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • August 17, 2020
    ...of other facts consistent with the challenged pleading could not possibly cure the deficiency.’ " DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc. , 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) (quoting Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co. , 806 F.2d 1393, 1401 (9th Cir. 1986) ). In other words, where......
  • Dunakin v. Quigley, CASE NO. C14-0567JLR
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Western District of Washington)
    • April 10, 2015
    ...only denied when it is clear that the deficiencies of the complaint cannot be cured by amendment. See DeSoto v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 957 F.2d 655, 658 (9th Cir. 1992) ("A district court does not err in denying leave to amend where the amendment would be futile."). It is not clear that......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT