| 20. TIME: 9:00 CASE#: MSC11-00162
CASE NAME: CHRISTINA PENNES vs. PNC MORTGAGE HEARING ON DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT of PENNES FILED BY PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION * TENTATIVE RULING: *
Defendant PNC Bank, N.A.’s Demurrer to each cause of action within the Complaint is sustained with leave to amend in part and without leave to amend in part. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc., section 430.10, subd. (e).)
1st cause of action for Cancellation of Instruments (Assignment of Deed of Trust), 2nd cause of action for Cancellation of Instruments (Notice of Default), and 3rd cause of action for Cancellation of Instruments (Notice of Default), sustained with leave to amend. Actions to remove a cloud on title, under Civil Code section 3412, are equitable in nature, and differ from actions to quiet title in that they are aimed at a particular instrument or piece of evidence. Reiner v. Danial (1989) 211 Cal. App. 3d 682, 689. To state a cause of action to remove a cloud, instead of pleading in general terms that the defendant claims an adverse interest, the plaintiff must allege, inter alia, facts showing actual invalidity of the apparently valid instrument or piece of evidence. (5 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Pleading, sections 671-674, pp. 97-99.) Plaintiffs have not met this burden. See Complaint par 20, Ex D. See also, Gomes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (2011) 192 Cal. App. 4th 1149 1154-55 [under Civ C section 2924(a)(1), a trustee, mortgagee, or beneficiary, or any of their authorized agents, may initiate the foreclosure process. Nowhere, however, does the statute provide for a judicial action to determine whether the person initiating the foreclosure process is indeed authorized, and the court saw no ground for implying such an action, which would have been inconsistent with the policy behind nonjudicial foreclosure of providing a quick, inexpensive and efficient remedy.]
4th cause of action for wrongful foreclosure, sustained with leave to amend. The elements of a common-law cause of action for damages for wrongful foreclosure are: (1) Trustee or mortgagee caused an illegal, fraudulent or willfully oppressive sale of real property; (2) pursuant to a power of sale contained in a mortgage or deed of trust; and (3) the Trustor or mortgagor sustained damages. (Munger v. Moore (1970) 11 Cal. App. 3d 1, 7; see 4 Witkin, Sum. Of Cal. Law (10th ed. 2005) Secured Transactions in Real Property, §168.) The Plaintiffs do not allege that the foreclosure sale has taken place. Thus, Plaintiffs fail to plead a necessary element of this cause of action.
5th cause of action for violation of UCL, and 8th caused of action for violation of Rosenthal Debt Collection Practices Act [Civ C section 1788], sustained without leave to amend. California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) prohibits any unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business practice. (B&P Code section 17200.) The broad scope of the statute encompasses both anti-competitive business practices and practices injurious to consumers. (Cel‑Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 163, 180.) This cause of action is based in part upon the 8th cause of action for violation of the Rosenthal Debt Collection Practices Act [Civ C § 1788.] The Rosenthal Debt Collection Practices Act [RDCPA] prohibits debt collectors from engaging in abusive, deceptive and unfair practices in the collection of consumer debts. (Civ. Code section 1788, et. Seq.) Consumer debt is statutorily defined as money, property or the equivalent owed by reason of a consumer credit transaction, which in turn is defined as a transaction in which property, etc. is acquired on credit for personal, family or household purposes. Cal. Civ. Code section 1788.2(b), (e)-(f), (h). There are no California State Court opinions to date applying this statute to the enforcement of deeds of trust or to foreclosure proceedings.
6th cause of action for quiet title, sustained with leave to amend: To state a claim for quiet title, the complaint shall be verified. CCP section 761.020. The Complaint is not verified. Additionally, in order to quiet title, plaintiff must tender the entire outstanding principal. See, e.g., Aguilar v. Bocci (1974) 39 Cal.App.3d 475, 477 [Plaintiff cannot quiet title without discharging his debt; the cloud upon his title persists until the debt is paid.]
7th cause of action for rescission, sustained without leave to amend. To state a claim for contract rescission, plaintiff must allege some grounds for rescission-fraud, mistake, coercion, etc. (Civ. Code, § 1689, subd. (b).) plaintiffs do not meet hits pleading burden. Plaintiffs Opposition does not address this cause of action, therefore, they concede that it has no merit.
9th cause of action for violation of Civ C § 2923.5, sustained with leave to amend: Actual contact is not required. See, Civil Code section 2923.59(g). Additionally, the only remedy for a Section 2923.5 violation is a postponement of the foreclosure sale to enable the defendants to comply with the requirements of the statute — not a claim for damages. (Mabry v. Superior Court (2010) 185 Cal. App. 4th 208, 235.) The Plaintiffs do not allege that a foreclosure sale date has been noticed. Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice is granted. (Evid. Code, section 452(c)[public records].
In light of the ruling on the general demurrer, the special demurrer is moot. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc., section 430.10, subd. (f).) |
| 21. TIME: 9:00 CASE#: MSC11-00162
CASE NAME: CHRISTINA PENNES vs. PNC MORTGAGE HEARING ON MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT FILED BY PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION * TENTATIVE RULING: *
In llight of the ruling on the general demurrer, the Motion to Strike is moot.
|
NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE AND HOME123 CORP VICTIMS—SOME INFO OF INTEREST
THEY DID ASSIGNMENTS IN BLANK AND THEIR BKR TRUSTEE ATTORNEY STATES THEY ARE STILL DOING SO POST PETITION
CALIFORNIANS–SOME VERY GOOD INFORMATION ON UNLAWFUL DETAINER PROCESS AND LAWS HERE. IT IS CURRENT 2011
http://www2.courtinfo.ca.gov/protem/courses/ud/index.htm