Overview

Overview

HOLDINGS: [1]-Res judicata did not apply; [2]-A mortgagor lacked standing to pursue her wrongful foreclosure claim because her claim that a transfer occurred too late to satisfy the Pooling and Servicing Agreement and the IRC’s definition of a qualified mortgage would result in a voidable, rather than void, transaction; [3]-The mortgagor did not show that only qualified mortgages could be transferred into a Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (REMIC) trust, which made the attempted transfer voidable; [4]-A forgery of the notary signature on the 2014 document substituting the trustee on the Deed of Trust (DOT)  would result in a voidable transaction; [5]-The mortgagor’s lack of standing to challenge the transfer of the DOT and Note into the REMIC trust was fatal to her California’s Homeowner Bill of Rights, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 2920-2924, claim. Parties’ Los Angeles litigation attorney appeal.

Outcome

Judgment affirmed.

Overview

The borrowers’ claims against one bank and its officials were severed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21(b) where the allegations failed to establish that the claims related to or arose out of the same transactions or occurrences as the claims against the other banks and bank officials, and there was no interrelationship between the bank groups. Moreover, there were no common factual questions based on the complaint’s allegations.

Outcome

Motion to sever granted. Motion to transfer denied.