Case ID: f-appx_434/html/0575-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Alan HONARMAND, Appellant, v. J.C. PENNEY, Appellee.
    No. 11-1614.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Oct. 21, 2011.
    Filed: Oct. 26, 2011.
    Alan Honarmand, Little Rock, AR, pro se.
    Bettina E. • Brownstein, Jane A. Kim, Wright & Lindsey, Little Rock, AR, Christine S. Son, J.C. Penney Company Legal Department, Plano, TX, for Appellee.
    Before MURPHY, ARNOLD, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Alan Honarmand appeals the district court’s 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., 148 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 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. 
      
      . The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.