Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint; Motion for Leave to Record a Lis Pendens; Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint
25CV144329: MARTINEZ vs SELENE FINANCE LP, et al. 07/09/2026 Hearing on Demurrer Demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint; filed by Selene Finance LP (Defendant) + CRS# 140607305635 in Department 512
Tentative Ruling - 07/08/2026 Elizabeth Riles
The Demurrer filed by Selene Finance LP, RCF 2 Acquisition Trust on 04/24/2026 is Sustained without Leave to Amend.
Defendants Selene Finance LPs (Selene) and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, Not in its Individual Capacity by Solely as Owner Trustee for RCF 2 Acquisition Trusts (RFC Trust) (Selene and RFC Trust are collectively Defendant) unopposed Demurrer to plaintiff Kristina Martinezs (Plaintiff) Second Amended Complaint (SAC) is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
The Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Record a Lis Pendens.
Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint set for hearing on 8/20/2026 is DROPPED.
ALLEGATIONS OF SAC
Plaintiffs SAC seeks to Quiet Title with respect to her ownership of the real property known as 3872 West Street, Oakland, California 94608 (the Property). She alleges that on 4/14/2023, she became the sole owner of the Property, but subject to a Deed of Trust recorded on the same date naming Amwest Funding Corp. as beneficiary and TICOR as trustee to secure an alleged loan. (SAC ¶¶ 1 and 21-23.) The only Grant Deed attached to the Complaint is dated 3/21/2013 pursuant to which Plaintiff and Sagirah Shamsun Bey (Bey) became owners of the Property as joint tenants.
Presumably, Plaintiff obtained Ms. Beys interest in the Property in or around 4/14/2023, as alleged above, at which time Plaintiff took out a loan secured by the Property from lender Amwest Funding Corp. (Amwest), possibly to buy out Ms. Beys interest in the Property. The SAC does not allege that the 4/14/2023 Deed of Trust was improperly recorded or fraudulent on the grounds that Amwest did not loan Plaintiff $650,000, as stated in this Deed of Trust.
The Deed of Trust recorded on 4/14/2023, attached to the FAC, in favor of Amwest and for which Ticor Title is listed as trustee provides at ¶ 21:
The Note or a partial interest in the Note, together with this Security Instrument, may be sold or otherwise transferred one or more times. Upon such a sale or other transfer, all of Lender's rights and obligations under this Security Instrument will convey to Lender's successors and assigns.
Also attached to the SAC is a document recorded on 9/15/2025 entitled Corporate Assignment to Deed of Trust (the Assignment), pursuant to which Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS), as beneficiary, as nominee for Amwest purports to assign the above-described 25CV144329: MARTINEZ vs SELENE FINANCE LP, et al. 07/09/2026 Hearing on Demurrer Demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint; filed by Selene Finance LP (Defendant) + CRS# 140607305635 in Department 512 Deed of Trust to RFC Trust for value received. The Assignment appears, at least on its face, to be a valid assignment of Amwests interest in the Deed of Trust to RFC Trust pursuant to ¶ 21 of the Deed of Trust quoted above.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Nevertheless, Plaintiff alleges that the Assignment to RFC Trust is void based on the alleged fact that no document has been recorded showing that Amwest transferred its interest to one of Defendants. (SAC ¶¶ 24-28.) However, the Assignment appears to directly contradict this allegation in that it plainly states that MERS is the beneficiary of the Deed of Trust as nominee of Amwest and is transferring its interest to RFC Trust. (SAC Exh. C.)
The SAC prays for an Order of Court nullifying the Deed of Trust based on the alleged void assignment to RFC Trust, quieting title to the Property in favor of Plaintiff, and barring Defendants from commencing foreclosures.
ANALYSIS OF DEMURRER
Plaintiff does not appear to have filed with the Court or provided to Dept. 512 electronic courtesy copies of any opposition papers at Dept. 512s email address for that purpose. Instead, on 4/21/2026 Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File a Third Amended Complaint, set to be heard on 8/20/2026.
The Court finds that Plaintiff lacks standing to receive the relief the SAC requests where she has not alleged her tender of all monies due on the underlying $650,000 loan provided to her by Amwest, and the SAC does not allege Defendants have commenced non-judicial foreclosure proceedings on the Property. (Shimpones v. Stickney (1934) 219 Cal. 637, 649 (It is settled in California that a mortgagor [i.e., borrower] cannot quiet his title against the mortgagee [lender] without paying the debt secured.); Aguilar v.
Bocci (1974) 39 Cal.App.3d 475, 477-478 (Borrower is entitled to remain in possession, but cannot clear his title without satisfying his debt.); Warwick v. Bank of New York Mellon, etc. (9th Cir. 2019) 771 Fed. Appx. 729, 729, quoting Shimpones, supra; Saterbak v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 808, 814-815 (holding that plaintiff bringing a pre-emptive action to determine that assignment of deed of trust was void to prevent anticipated but not yet commenced non-judicial foreclosure proceedings lacked standing to challenge the assignment and distinguishing the Yvanova case cited by the FAC at ¶ 10 and 3(2).))
Plaintiff has been afforded an opportunity in her Second Amended Complaint to address these issues, but the SAC does not adequately allege facts that would confer standing for Plaintiff under the alleged circumstances. Because she has not filed any Opposition papers, Plaintiff has not advised the Court how she may properly further amend her pleading to state a viable cause of action to quiet title when no non-judicial foreclosure is alleged to have commenced.
Wherefore, the Court SUSTAINS Defendants Demurrer to the SACs First Cause of Action to Quiet Title WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
25CV144329: MARTINEZ vs SELENE FINANCE LP, et al. 07/09/2026 Hearing on Demurrer Demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint; filed by Selene Finance LP (Defendant) + CRS# 140607305635 in Department 512
Defendants cite to Ivanoff v. Bank of America, N.A. (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 719, 734 for the proposition that Plaintiffs Second Cause of Action for Injunctive Relief is not a stand-alone cause of action because
Injunctive relief is a remedy, not a cause of action. A cause of action must exist before a court may grant a request for injunctive relief.
Defendants contend that because the SACs Cause of Action for Quiet Title is not viable, the Demurrer should be sustained as to the Second Cause of Action for Injunctive Relief. The Court agrees with Defendants unopposed reasoning.
Wherefore, the Court SUSTAINS Defendants Demurrer to the Second Cause of Action for Injunctive Relief WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.
CONTESTING TENTATIVE RULINGS
PLEASE NOTE: If any party contests the tentative ruling, the hearing on the motion will occur remotely via the court's own video-conferencing system.
Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308, subdivision (a)(1), this tentative ruling will become the order of the Court unless it is contested before 4:00 PM on the court day preceding the noticed hearing date.
To contest a tentative ruling, a party should do the following:
First, the party must notify Department 512, by email at Dept512@alameda.courts.ca.gov and copy all counsel of record and self-represented parties. The contesting party must state in the subject line of the email the case name, case number and motion.
Second, the party shall log into the eCourt Public Portal, search for this case (e.g., by case number), select the case name, select the "Tentative Rulings" tab, click the "Click to Contest this Ruling" button, enter the party's name and a brief statement of the party's reason for contesting the tentative, and click "Proceed."
Parties may appear via videoconference, using the Zoom.com website or application.
TO CONNECT TO ZOOM:
Join the meeting using the following link: https://www.zoomgov.com/j/16057661931 Join the meeting by Phone:
Meeting ID: 160 5766 1931
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
25CV144329: MARTINEZ vs SELENE FINANCE LP, et al. 07/09/2026 Hearing on Demurrer Demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint; filed by Selene Finance LP (Defendant) + CRS# 140607305635 in Department 512
1 669 254 5252, 16057661931# US (San Jose) 1 669 216 1590, 16057661931# US (San Jose) 833 568 8864 US Toll-free