Bruner

Bruner v. Merrill Lynch, Inc.

Good Law
266 F. App'x 625
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 12, 2008No. 06-35136California516 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

A.L. Bruner, Marilyn Bruner, and B & C Housing, Inc. (collectively, Bruner), appeal the district court’s denial of Bruner’s motion to vacate an arbitration award in favor of Merrill Lynch, Inc. We see no fundamental unfairness in the arbitration panel’s refusal either to hear testimony from Adam Quinton and Keith McClung, or to receive approximately 55,000 pages of documents into evidence. 9 U.S.C. § 10 (a)(3); see Sunshine Mining Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, 823 F.2d 1289, 1295 (9th Cir.1987) (noting standard). Accordingly, we affirm.

There is no basis for concluding that Quinton’s testimony would have been crucial. Bruner has not pointed to any place in the record indicating what Quinton’s testimony would have been, if called. In any event, pertinent facts in support of both counts in Bruner’s statement of claim were adduced through others. Further, there was evidence showing that Bruner called his own shots and did not read research reports; that the reports were not fraudulent and did not omit information that would have rendered the statements made not misleading; that opinions in the reports were forward-looking and discussed risk; and that the…

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.

Bruner · Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · 2008 | Caselegis