Bruns

Bruns v. National Credit Union Administration

Good Law
122 F.3d 1251·97 Daily Journal DAR 11005·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 22629·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6758
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 25, 1997No. 95-56843California3,665 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Robert Bruns appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint against his former employer the Health Associates Federal Credit Union (“HAFCU”), its parent organization, officers and directors of HAFCU and its parent, the National Credit Union Administration (“NCUA”), and three NCUA employees. The district court determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Bruns’ claims and that venue was improper. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. However, we remand the case to the district court with instructions to remand certain of Bruns’ claims to the state court.

I. FACTS

Robert Bruns became HAFCU’s CEO on March 1, 1993. His oral employment contract provided that he would be employed for no less than three years, could be terminated for just cause, and would receive a base salary, benefits, and an annual performance bonus of up to $30,000. The oral contract included the implied requirement that HAFCU indemnify Bruns against regulator claims and other actions arising in the course of his employment.

At some point between March and November 1993, Bruns initiated a bond claim on behalf of HAFCU against certain of its officers and directors. In…

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.