Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Geary v. Dames & Moore Corp., 10th Cir. (2000)
Geary v. Dames & Moore Corp., 10th Cir. (2000)
FEB 22 2000
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
PATRICIA GEARY,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
No. 99-1122
(D.C. No. 97-WY-700-WD)
(D. Colo.)
v.
DAMES AND MOORE
CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination
of this appeal.
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
identified the regulations on which her allegations of illegal conduct are based.
In her reply brief, she also asserts that to have allowed the alleged illegal conduct
would have been illegal or unethical on her part as well.
Appellants argument that a contract arose before she signed the
disclaimers was not presented to the district court; therefore, we need not
consider it on appeal absent special circumstances which are not present here.
See Smith v. Rogers Galvanizing Co.
1175 (10th Cir. 1999), applying the same standards as that court pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). After a careful review of the record on appeal and the
parties briefs in light of the applicable law, we are convinced that the district
court correctly decided this case. Therefore, for substantially the same reasons
set forth in the district courts Order and Judgment, dated February 16, 1999,
the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado
is AFFIRMED.
Robert H. Henry
Circuit Judge
-3-