Robert Keenan v. First California Bank

MEMORANDUM **

Robert B. Keenan appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of First California Bank. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we review de novo, see Solis v. Washington, 656 F.3d 1079, 1083 (9th Cir.2011), and we affirm.

I.

In 2005, Appellant Robert B. Keenan had a deposit account at First California Bank. According to Keenan, the account held many months’ worth of Social Security payments.

On October 31, 2005, the California Franchise Tax Board sent an Order to Withhold to First California. According to the Franchise Tax Board, Keenan owed taxes for tax years 1982, 1986, 1987, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1996, with the amount due totaling $292,234.51. The Franchise Tax Board directed First California to withhold the lesser of (1) the amount due, or (2) the amount under its control belonging to Keenan.

The Order included a sheet with excerpts from the California Revenue and Taxation Code, including § 18670, which details the procedures for dealing with Orders to Withhold, and § 18672, which provides that any person “failing to withhold the amount due from any taxpayer and to transmit the same to the Franchise Tax Board after service of…

concurring:

I concur in the result.

FILED

NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 02 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROBERT B. KEENAN, No. 09-55428

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:06-cv-01793-JVS-PJW

v.

MEMORANDUM *

FIRST CALIFORNIA BANK,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 18, 2011 Pasadena, California

Before: W. FLETCHER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and MILLS,** District Judge.

Robert B. Keenan appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

favor of First California Bank. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we

review de novo, see Solis v. Washington, 656 F.3d 1079, 1083 (9th Cir. 2011), and

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The Honorable Richard Mills, United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, sitting by designation. we affirm.

I.

In 2005,…