Daisley

MEMORANDUM **

Robert Daisley and Lee Kerslake appeal summary judgment in favor of Ozzy Osbourne and others related to him, as well as the district court’s refusal to reconsider its ruling. Two claims remain at issue, for improper credit and for royalties based on an open book account. We affirm.

I

Whether or not an open book account was ever created, Daisley and Kerslake knew after settlement of the United Kingdom litigation in 1986 that they were not receiving royalties. They were told in July 1986 by Sharon Osbourne (who they knew spoke for the relevant entities) that the UK litigation and Daisley’s buy-out agreement settled the matter, that they were not entitled to record royalties, and that they were not being paid and never would be. This was confirmed after a call to Osbourne’s English accountant in August 1991. So, no later than August 1991, at the outside, Daisley and Kerslake were aware that the royalties to which they believed they were entitled had dried up and that payment had been refused. That is when their claim accrued (assuming an open book account existed), and the statute of limitations began to run. See Cusano v. Klein, 264 F.3d 936, 947-48 (9th Cir.2001);…