Reid Tamayose v. Option One Mortgage Corporatio
This text of 563 F. App'x 563 (Reid Tamayose v. Option One Mortgage Corporatio) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Reid and Nadine Tamayose appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment for defendants in their Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) claim for rescission. We review de novo an order granting summary judgment, Doe v. Abbott Labs., 571 F.3d 930, 933 (9th Cir.2009), and affirm.
Under applicable federal law, the parties who seek to rescind a loan agreement under TILA carry the burden of proving that they could tender the loan proceeds to extinguish the loan. Yamamoto v. Bank of N.Y., 329 F.3d 1167, 1171 (9th Cir.2003). The Tamayoses failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that they could tender the proceeds of the loan in the event that the court granted them rescission. We do not discuss the Tamayoses’ arguments that Yamamoto should be overruled. A three judge panel is bound by Yamamoto “until such time as the Supreme Court or an en banc panel of [this] court revisits this issue.” Covarrubias Te *564 poste v. Holder, 632 F.3d 1049, 1056 n. 2 (9th Cir.2011).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
563 F. App'x 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reid-tamayose-v-option-one-mortgage-corporatio-ca9-2014.