Disibio

Disibio v. Bank of Oakland

Good Law
71 F. App'x 760
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 14, 2003No. 01-17100, 01-17206; D.C. No. CV-00-01764-CRBCalifornia824 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs Lewis, Mary, Nancy, and Guy diSibio appeal the district court’s enforcement of an alleged settlement they reached with Defendant Bank of Oakland regarding the terms of their accounts. The Bank cross-appeals, arguing that the district court abused its discretion in not sanctioning the diSibios for refusing to honor the settlement.

I.

In the early nineties the diSibios opened “Cash Accumulator” accounts with the Bank. In 1999, the Bank sent a letter to “Cash Accumulator” accounts holders, announcing that the interest rates would be reduced. Unhappy with the reduced rates, the diSibios filed a lawsuit to enforce their rights under the original account agreements.

The district court referred the case to a magistrate judge for a settlement conference. At the settlement conference, Lewis and Mary diSibio appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs, and Michael Sanford, President and CEO of the Bank, appeared on behalf of the defendant. Each side was represented by counsel. After approximately three hours of negotiating, the magistrate judge went on the record, stating that the parties had “reached a framework which would settle the case.” Lewis and Mary diSibio…

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.