From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daghlian v. Devry Univ

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 31, 2009
574 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. 2009)

Summary

dismissing the plaintiff's pending claims because they were wholly dependent on a California statute that was repealed without a savings clause

Summary of this case from Lawson v. Grubhub, Inc.

Opinion

No. 08-55036.

Argued and Submitted July 9, 2009.

Filed July 31, 2009.

Gregory N. Karasik and J. Mark Moore, Spiro Moss Barness, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the appellant.

Margaret M. Grignon and Felicia Y. Yu, Reed Smith LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Kim M. Watterson, Reed Smith LLP, Pittsburgh, PA, for the appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-06-00994-MMM.

Before: KIM McLANE WARDLAW, JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, and N. RANDY SMITH, Circuit Judges.


ORDER


Saro Daghlian appeals the district court's denial of his motion for class certification and grant of summary judgment in favor of DeVry University and its parent company, DeVry Inc. We lack jurisdiction over this appeal, and thus dismiss.

The California Private Post-secondary and Vocational Education Reform Act ("Act"), on which all of Daghlian's claims are based, was repealed without a savings clause effective January 1, 2008. See Cal. Educ. Code § 94999 (West 2007). No subsequent legislation has been enacted to revive the Act. As Daghlian concedes, the repeal of the Act abates his Education Code claims. See Governing Bd. of Rialto Unified Sch. Dist. v. Mann, 18 Cal.3d 819, 135 Cal.Rptr. 526, 558 P.2d 1, 2 (1977) (in bank); see also Cal. Gov. Code § 9606 ( West 2009). The appeal is therefore moot unless an exception to the abatement rule applies. See Zipperer v. County of Santa Clara, 133 Cal.App.4th 1013, 35 Cal. Rptr.3d 487, 493-94 (Cal.App. 2005); Younger v. Superior Court, 21 Cal.3d 102, 145 Cal.Rptr. 674, 577 P.2d 1014, 1018-19 (1978) (in bank). We conclude that no exception applies. Daghlian did not state a claim for breach of contract, and his other claims were "wholly statutory," Zipperer, 35 Cal.Rptr.3d at 494, as they were derivative of a violation of the Act. Because we cannot grant any effective relief, we lack jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. See Cook Inlet Treaty Tribes v. Shalala, 166 F.3d 986, 989 (9th Cir. 1999).

We grant DeVry's motion to take judicial notice of the Complete Bill History of S.B. 823, which would have established the California Private Postsecondary Education Act of 2008, but was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.

DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Daghlian v. Devry Univ

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 31, 2009
574 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. 2009)

dismissing the plaintiff's pending claims because they were wholly dependent on a California statute that was repealed without a savings clause

Summary of this case from Lawson v. Grubhub, Inc.

dismissing for lack of jurisdiction because the California statute under which the plaintiff sued “was repealed without a savings clause” to preserve pending claims

Summary of this case from Yakima Valley Mem'l Hosp. v. Wash. State Dep't of Health
Case details for

Daghlian v. Devry Univ

Case Details

Full title:Saro DAGHLIAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 31, 2009

Citations

574 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. 2009)

Citing Cases

Yakima Valley Mem'l Hosp. v. Wash. State Dep't of Health

By the same token, Congress could enact a savings clause to avoid the natural implication of repealing an…

Lawson v. Grubhub, Inc.

Governing Bd. of Rialto Unified Sch. Dist. v. Mann , 18 Cal.3d 819, 135 Cal.Rptr. 526, 558 P.2d 1, 6 (1977) ;…