Frank Sanes, Jr. v. Budget Finance Company

MEMORANDUM

Frank Sanes, Jr., an attorney, appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his action arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Pardi v. Kaiser Found. Hosps., 389 F.3d 840, 848 (9th Cir.2004), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Sanes failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether his claims were barred by the terms of the settlement agreement in his prior state court action. See id. (upholding settlement agreement where plaintiff failed to establish that the agreement was procured by economic duress or any other basis that would render it invalid).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Sanes’ motion for reconsideration because Sanes failed to raise his contention that the settlement agreement was void as a matter of public policy in his opposition to summary judgment. See Novato Fire Prot. Dist. v. United States, 181 F.3d 1135 , 1141 n. 6 (9th Cir.1999) (“A district court has discretion to decline to consider an issue raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration.”). Further, Sanes’ failure to raise…