Navarro v. U.S. Bank Nat. Assn. CA2/2
Filed 4/7/15 Navarro v. U.S. Bank Nat. Assn. CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
RIGOBERTO NAVARRO et al., B253632
Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC487520) v.
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION et al.,
Defendants and Respondents.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Barbara M. Scheper, Judge. Affirmed.
Law Offices of Motaz M. Gerges and Motaz M. Gerges for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
K&L Gates and Kevin S. Asfour for Defendants and Respondents U.S. Bank National Association and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Barrett Daffin Frappier Treder & Weiss and Edward A. Treder for Defendants and Respondents Barrett Daffin Frappier Treder & Weiss and Dana J. Seyler.
_________________________
This appeal is from the dismissal of a putative class action seeking “the injunction of various foreclosures and eviction proceedings that happened in California . . . based on the Defendants’ routine failure to comply with statutory prerequisites to foreclosure.” The dismissal follows the trial court’s sustaining of a demurrer to the “First Amended Class Action Complaint” (FAC)1 without leave to amend. We affirm.2 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Allegations of the FAC The FAC alleges that a class of numerous defendants, including respondents,3 engaged in wrongful foreclosure activity in California against certain classes of borrowers, including appellants, by, inter alia, their “routine failure to comply with statutory prerequisites to foreclosure”; lack of “legal authority to enter the property and/or exercise the power of sale”; failure to first obtain “assignment of the mortgage and the power of sale”; and “unlawfully evict[ing] Plaintiffs from their resident [sic].” The FAC focuses on an alleged “foreclosure crisis” in California, which is a direct result of “Defendants and others” failing to comply with statutory foreclosure requirements. The FAC does not include any allegations specific to appellants, their property, their loan, or the circumstances surrounding their eviction and foreclosure.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)