U-Haul International, Inc. v. Estate of Albright

Good Law
626 F.3d 498·2010 WL 4720696·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 23943
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 22, 201007-16482California756 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nathan Albright and Steven Wamser acted as counsel for the National Labor Relations Board in an action against U-Haul. U-Haul sued Albright and Warnser, alleging that they improperly obtained privileged information and used it against U-Haul during the proceedings. The United States Attorney for Nevada certified under the Westfall Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (d), that Wamser was acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the alleged conduct. Accordingly, the United States Attorney filed a notice of removal and sought to substitute the United States as the defendant for Wamser. The government then moved to dismiss the claims against Wamser, in part because U-Haul had failed to exhaust its claims as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a). U-Haul challenged Wamser’s certification and opposed the government’s motion to dismiss.

The district court upheld Wamser’s certification and went on sua sponte to substitute the United States as a defendant for Albright, even though the government never certified Albright or intervened on his behalf. The district judge concluded that Albright was acting within his scope of employment…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.