Rundgren v. Washington Mutual Bank, FA

Good Law
760 F.3d 1056·2014 WL 3720238·2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14622
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 29, 201412-15368California3,539 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikuta, J.

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 the Rundgrens’ claims. See 12 U.S.C. § 1821 (d)(13)(D).

I

In considering this facial challenge to the district court's subject matter jurisdiction, we assume the veracity of the Rund-grens’ allegations. See Savage v. Glendale Union High Sch., 348 F.3d 1036 , 1039 n. 2 (9th Cir.2003). In early 2005, the Rund-grens obtained a loan secured by a mortgage in favor of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc, on their property in Kilauea, Hawaii. Three years later, the Rundgrens refinanced their mortgage with WaMu for around $3,000,000. According to the Rundgrens, the loan refinancing was tainted by WaMu’s numerous fraudulent…

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.