Little Donkey Enterprises Washington, Inc. v. U.S. Bancorp

Good Law
136 F. App'x 91
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 20, 2005No. 04-35018; D.C. No. CV-02-05307-RBLCalifornia998 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Little Donkey Enterprises appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bancorp (“the Bank”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and review the district court’s order de novo. Cline v. Indus. Maint. Eng’g Constr. Co., 200 F.3d 1223 , 1228 (9th Cir.2000). We affirm.

I. Expedited Funds Availability Act

To properly make a claim under the Expedited Funds Availability Act (the “Funds Act”), Little Donkey was required to come forward with some evidence that it had made a specific type of deposit as defined by the Funds Act and that the Bank held that deposit beyond the specific timeframe allowed for by the statute. See 12 U.S.C. § 4002 (defining specific deposit types and required timeframes for when funds must be made available for these specific types of deposits.) Little Donkey has failed to come forward with any evidence establishing: 1) which, if any, deposit the Bank did not make available at the time of deposit, and 2) the amount of time that the deposit was held by the Bank.

Rather, Little Donkey has merely alleged that at some point after a series of deposits were made and presumably after the funds from those…

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.