Marin v. LaSalle Nat. Bank, N.A.

Full title: Mel A. MARIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LASALLE NATIONAL BANK, N.A.; et al.…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jun 13, 2002

37 F. App'x 314 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion

37 Fed.Appx. 314 (9th Cir. 2002) Mel A. MARIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LASALLE NATIONAL BANK, N.A.; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 01-17237. D.C. No. CV-01-00050-RCC. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. June 13, 2002

Submitted June 10, 2002. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Raner C. Collins, District Judge, Presiding.

Before O'SCANNLAIN, BERZON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Mel A. Marin appeals pro se the district court's summary judgment for LaSalle National Bank and others alleging breach of contract, violation of the National Bank Act, and violation of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Act in connection with the handling of a mortgage. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court's summary judgment de novo, Del E. Webb McQueen Dev. Corp. v. Resolution Trust Corp., 69 F.3d 355, 358 (9th Cir.1995), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment to Defendants on all claims because Marin is not a party to the contract

Page 315.

under which he seeks redress. See 12 U.S.C. § 86; 50 App.U.S.C. §§ 526, 531; Leal v. Allstate Ins. Co., 199 Ariz. 250, 17 P.3d 95, 99 (Ariz.Ct.App.2000); Echols v. Beauty Built Homes, Inc., 132 Ariz. 498, 647 P.2d 629, 631 (Ariz.1982).

AFFIRMED.