Legal Opinion
Rundgren v. Washington Mutual Bank, FA
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 29, 2014No. 12-15368PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
IKUTA, Circuit Judge:
This appeal requires us to consider whether the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), Pub.L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183, stripped the district court of jurisdiction over Todd and Michele Rundgren’s claims arising out of allegedly fraudulent acts by Washington Mutual Bank (WaMu). Because WaMu was placed into the receivership of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Rundgrens failed to exhaust the administrative remedies provided by FIRREA, the district court correctly determined it lacked authority to hear…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- The Wilderness Society Alaska Center for the Environment v. United States Fish & Wildlife ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa v. City SavingsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Rosa v. Resolution Trust Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Robert Henderson v. Bank of New EnglandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Benson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Michael Willner v. James DimonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2017
- Barnes v. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
- Akiachak Native Community v. United States Department of the InteriorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2016
- Sky Harbor Air Service, Inc., a Wyoming Corporation, and H. Paul Martin v. Cheyenne Regional Airport Board, a Wyoming CorporationWyoming Supreme Court · 2016
- Western & Southern Life Insurance v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2014
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.