Walden v. Resolution Trust Corp.

980 F.2d 740 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Max WALDEN, Hanford Victorian Inn, Inc., Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, Receiver for Westport Federal Savings Bank; Kings Harvest Savings and Loan Association, a Division of Westport Savings Bank, and Does 1-50, inclusive, Defendants/Appellees. No. 91-16322. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 14, 1992. Decided Nov. 30, 1992. 1 Before SCHROEDER, WILLIAM A. NORRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM * 3 This case requires us to decide whether the doctrine of D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. FDIC, 315 U.S. 447 (1942), bars an action to recover for breach of an oral contract to make a loan. Following FSLIC v. Gemini, 921 F.2d 241 (9th Cir.1990), we hold that it does, and affirm the summary judgment in favor of the Resolution Trust Corporation ("RTC"). 4 We review the district court's entry of summary judgment de novo. Darring v. Kincheloe, 783 F.2d 874,…