Pareto

Pareto v. Federal Deposit Insurance

Good Law
139 F.3d 696·98 Daily Journal DAR 2691·1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 5021·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1912
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 1998No. 97-16023California2,594 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fernandez, J.

Stanley Pareto, and others in a group of former stockholders of Barbary Coast National Bank (hereafter collectively referred to as “Pareto”) appeal the dismissal of a suit against certain of the bank’s former directors and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the receiver for the bank. The district court dismissed the action on the basis that Pareto lacked standing. He appealed and we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Pareto brought this action in state court against certain of Barbary Coast’s former directors, alleging violations of the duties of care and loyalty under California Corporations Code section 309, and seeking punitive damages under California Civil Code section 3294. The state trial court denied the directors’ demurrer and the state court of appeal then denied their petition for a writ of mandate. Subsequently, Pareto served the FDIC as a defendant. Once served, the FDIC removed the action to the United States District Court and then moved to dismiss for lack of standing and failure to state a claim. The directors also moved to dismiss. The district court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint without leave to amend.

Pareto alleged that: Barbary Coast’s…

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.