ALBERT H. WONG ET AL VS. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON ET AL

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for June 2, 2026. Line 2. DEFENDANT ZBS LAW LLP DEMURRER to Amended COMPLAINT is SUSTAINED without leave to amend.

The allegations alleged in the Second Amended Complaint taken together with the judicially noticed documents do not show ZBS Law LLP's malice sufficient to overcome ZBS' statutory privilege under Civil Code sections 2924 and 47. Under subdivision (b) of Civil Code section 2924, the foreclosure trustee is protected from liability for good faith errors when it relies on information provided in good faith by the beneficiary regarding the nature and amount of the default under the secured obligation, deed of trust, or mortgage.

The Court takes judicial notice of the (i) Deed of Trust, (ii) the declaration of Robert Orgeta, Custodian of Records for Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing which is the loan servicer for Bank of New York Mellon; (iii) the Substitution of Trustee; (iv), the Notice of Default, (v) the Notice of Trustee's Sale, (iv) the Trustee's Deed Upon Sale. With respect to the declaration, the Court is not taking judicial notice for the truth asserted therein, such as note ownership, beneficiary status, or authority to foreclose. Rather, they are being used to negate Plaintiff's claim of malice, namely, that ZBS had a reasonable belief in BONY's claim to ownership of the note and deed of trust, and in turn, their authority to foreclose.

Plaintiff alleges that ZBS knew or recklessly disregarded that [BONY] was not the beneficiary of record and had not complied with 2924.17. (See, SAC paras. 34, 37.) But the declaration includes exhibits such as the Countrywide endorsed Note in blank and the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated June 1, 2007, evidencing the purchase of the Note and the rights under the Deed of Trust from Countrywide to BONY. Moreover, Civil Code 2924.17 does not require that an Assignment of a Deed of Trust be recorded as a prerequisite for a beneficiary to substitute a new trustee or for a trustee to have standing and authority to initiate nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings.

The Court's conclusion that the judicially noticed documents provided ZBS a reasonable basis to believe in the legitimacy of the nonjudicial foreclosure proceeding and the truth of the documents ZBS recorded, is not a conclusion that their belief was accurate. (See, Schep v. Capital One, N.A. (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 1331, 1337-1338.) Rather, it negates Plaintiff's claims of malice or reckless disregard as to the foreclosing trustee. =(501/CFH)