Hedman v. Nationstar Mortgage CA3

Filed 5/4/16 Hedman v. Nationstar Mortgage CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (San Joaquin) ----

KEITH OLIN HEDMAN et al., C079416

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Super. Ct. No. 39-2014- 00307185-CU-OR-STK) v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

Plaintiffs Keith and Adrialyn Hedman appeal from two awards of attorney fees after both defendants obtained judgments of dismissal following successful demurrers. One award was to defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, Nationstar Mortgage, Jay Bray, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) (collectively Nationstar), and the other to defendant CMG Mortgage, Inc. (CMG). Although this appeal is from the awards of attorney fees, the Hedmans, in propria persona, challenge almost exclusively the propriety of the judgments of dismissal.

1

Because the Hedmans have failed to show an abuse of discretion in the awards of attorney fees, we affirm. We deny Nationstar’s request for sanctions, but caution the Hedmans about their continuing practice of filing late, duplicative, and irrelevant motions. BACKGROUND In 2004, the Hedmans took out a loan from CMG to purchase a house. The loan was secured by a deed of trust on the property. In 2013, MERS (as nominee of CMG) assigned the deed of trust to Nationstar. About the same time, the Hedmans defaulted on the loan. In July 2013, a notice of default and election to sell was filed, indicating the Hedmans owed $28,413.79. A trustee’s sale was scheduled for November. In February 2014, the Hedmans filed suit against Nationstar, CMG, and many others. The complaint alleged intentional misrepresentation, conspiracy, unfair business practices, and unlawful foreclosure. Both Nationstar and CMG demurred and the trial court sustained both demurrers with leave to amend. After the Hedmans failed to amend the complaint within the time allowed, both Nationstar and CMG applied ex parte for a judgment of dismissal. On December 4, 2014, the trial court entered a judgment in favor of Nationstar and a judgment in favor of CMG. On February 10, 2015, CMG moved for attorney fees pursuant to a provision in the deed of trust and noticed a hearing for March 10. It sought $21,385.50 in fees. Any opposition to this motion was due at least nine days before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b).) A week before the hearing, CMG filed a “notice of nonopposition” to the fee award. The day before the hearing, the Hedmans filed a “dispute and response,” asserting the judgment of dismissal was void. The accompanying memorandum of points and authorities mostly argued the merits of the underlying lawsuit. It claimed the attorney fees were too high “Given their Lack of Knowledge of the subject matter.”