Bruce Harrigan v. Lennar Corporation, No. 10-55024 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED MAR 28 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BRUCE DAVID HARRIGAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 10-55024 D.C. No. 8:09-cv-00446-CJCMLG v. LENNAR CORPORATION, MEMORANDUM * Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Cormac J. Carney, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 8, 2011 ** Before: FARRIS, O SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Bruce David Harrigan appeals pro se from the district court s order dismissing his diversity action alleging state law claims against his former employer. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court properly dismissed Harrigan s claims concerning nonpayment of bonuses because he failed to allege facts suggesting that defendant was contractually bound to pay him. See First Comm. Mort. Co. v. Reece, 108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 23, 33 (Ct. App. 2001) (the first element to a breach of contract claim is the existence of valid contract); see also Rennick v. O.P.T.I.O.N. Care, 77 F.3d 309, 316 (9th Cir. 1996) (there is no contract where a party explicitly chooses not to bind itself). The district court properly dismissed Harrigan s claim concerning attorney s fees because he failed to allege facts suggesting that the defendant was obligated to reimburse him for such fees. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1021 (each party is to bear his own attorney s fees unless a statute or the agreement of the parties provides otherwise). Harrigan s remaining contentions are unpersuasive. Appellee s pending motion is denied. AFFIRMED. 2 10-55024

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.