Carey Brennan v. Opus Bank

Good Law
796 F.3d 1125·2015 WL 4731378
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 11, 201513-35580, 13-35598California4,433 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Brennan appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his action in favor of arbitration. Opus Bank cross appeals from the district court’s implicit denial of its motion to seal Brennan’s complaint, and the district court’s denial of its motion for reconsideration as moot. We have jurisdiction of both appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the district court’s dismissal in favor of arbitration, but we reverse the district court’s denial of Opus Bank’s motion for reconsideration as moot. Because the district court has inherent supervisory authority over its own records even after final judgment and the filing of a notice of appeal, we remand for the district court to decide Opus Bank’s motion to seal in the first instance.

I.

Brennan became the Executive Vice President and Director for Strategy and Corporate Development for Opus Bank in December 2010, when he signed an Employment Agreement with Opus Bank. The Employment Agreement described Brennan’s duties in section 2 as those “customary, appropriate and reasonable executive duties ... normally assigned to a person with such position at other similarly situated banks, including such duties as are…

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.