快活视频

 

Benson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank

Summarized by:

  • Court: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Archives
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Law
  • Date Filed: 03-20-2012
  • Case #: 10-17402; 10-17404
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Circuit Judge Lucero for the Court; Circuit Judges Callahan and N.R. Smith

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 bars claims asserted against a purchasing bank when the claim is based on the conduct of the failed institution, but does not bar claims based on the purchasing bank鈥檚 own acts.

Plaintiffs, a group of investors defrauded by the 鈥淢illennium Ponzi scheme,鈥 argued that JPMorgan, as successor in interest of Washington Mutual (鈥淲aMu鈥), is liable because it purchased most of WaMu鈥檚 assets and liabilities from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (鈥淔DIC鈥) and continued WaMu鈥檚 practices. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to exhaust the administrative remedies under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (鈥淔IRREA鈥) before filing a claim. After reviewing decisions from other circuits, the Court rejected the class鈥檚 argument that FIRREA鈥檚 jurisdictional bar against claims not first presented to the FDIC is limited to claims against a failed bank or the FDIC and therefore does not apply to claims against a purchasing bank. The Ninth Circuit concluded that the bar applies to claims asserted against a purchasing bank when the claim is based on the conduct of the failed institution. However, FIRREA does not bar claims based on the purchasing bank鈥檚 own acts. The Court held that a claim based on JPMorgan鈥檚 independent, post-purchase conduct would not be subject to FIRREA鈥檚 jurisdictional bar, but the class did not adequately plead a complaint. Therefore, the district court was correct in dismissing the complaint. AFFIRMED.

Advanced Search


Back to Top