Redwood Mortgage Investors VIII v. Gilerman CA2/1
Filed 1/24/22 Redwood Mortgage Investors VIII v. Gilerman CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
REDWOOD MORTGAGE B306199 INVESTORS VIII, (Los Angeles County Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Super. Ct. No. 19STCV46014) Respondent,
v.
ERINA GILERMAN,
Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David J. Cowan, Judge. Dismissed. The Sands Law Group, Thomas D. Sands; Michael Yesk for Defendant, Cross-complainant and Appellant. Law Office of Benjamin R. Levinson and Benjamin R. Levinson for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Respondent. ____________________________
Erina Gilerman appeals from the denial of a temporary restraining order (TRO) against a foreclosure sale of two properties securing her debt to respondent Redwood Mortgage Investors VIII (Redwood). Gilerman concedes in her appellate briefing that the foreclosure sale took place two days after the trial court denied her TRO. This appeal therefore is moot and we dismiss it.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2016, Redwood lent Gilerman $3 million in return for a promissory note secured by two deeds of trust against properties owned by Gilerman. On December 20, 2019, Redwood filed a complaint for judicial foreclosure of the deeds, alleging default by Gilerman. Gilerman cross-complained on February 10, 2020, alleging wrongdoing by Redwood related to the refinancing of the loan. Also in February 2020, Redwood served Gilerman notice of a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of the properties to take place on March 24, 2020. The sale was postponed several times at Redwood’s request, and ultimately was set for June 4, 2020. On May 29, 2020, Gilerman filed an ex parte application for a TRO blocking the upcoming June 4 foreclosure sale, and also requested an order to show cause regarding a preliminary injunction against the sale. Gilerman argued the sale was in violation of several orders issued in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the Judicial Council’s suspension of judicial foreclosure proceedings, the Governor’s order limiting foreclosures, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s order prohibiting gatherings of certain sizes, and the Governor’s stay-at-home order. Gilerman further contended
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)