Boghossian v. Nationstar Mortgage CA2/8

Filed 4/21/23 Boghossian v. Nationstar Mortgage CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

RAZMIK BOGHOSSIAN, B319390

Plaintiff and Appellant, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 19GDCV01163 v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Joel L. Lofton, Judge. Affirmed. Rodriguez Law Group and Patricia Rodriguez for Plaintiff and Appellant. Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, Justin D. Balser and Katalina Baumann for Defendant and Respondent. ____________________

Razmik Boghossian appeals from a judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court granted Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s motion for summary judgment. Because Boghossian failed to provide a proper brief or record, we affirm. Boghossian filed suit against Nationstar alleging violation of Civil Code section 2924.11 and the Unfair Competition Law, Bus. & Prof. Code sections 17200 et seq. Boghossian alleged Nationstar violated the Homeowner’s Bill of Rights by engaging in “dual-tracking,” meaning the loan servicer pursued foreclosure while Boghossian was seeking a loan modification. Boghossian alleged he submitted a complete loan modification application on July 12, 2019. Thus, he alleged, Nationstar’s recording of a notice of trustee’s sale on the same day violated Civil Code section 2924.11. He further alleged these actions constituted unlawful and unfair practices under the Unfair Competition Law. Nationstar moved for summary judgment. It argued the evidence showed Nationstar recorded the notice of trustee’s sale at 8:00 a.m. on July 12, 2019 and that Boghossian submitted his loan modification application materials no earlier than 2:45 p.m. that day. Nationstar also argued the legislature repealed the version of Civil Code section 2924.11 on which Boghossian relied effective January 1, 2019, and the proper Civil Code section was 2923.6. With respect to the Unfair Competition Law claim, Nationstar argued Boghossian had provided no evidence of damages to money or property as the trustee’s sale had not taken place and Boghossian therefore had no standing to bring an Unfair Competition Law claim. Nationstar also argued because the Homeowner’s Bill of Rights claim failed, there was no evidence of an unlawful or unfair business practice.