Schneider v. Bank of America N.A et al

Filing 295

AMENDED 292 JUDGMENT signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 06/01/16. (Benson, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER,

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-02953-JAM-EFB

12
Plaintiff,

The Hon. John A. Mendez

13
vs.
14
15
16
17
18
19

AMENDED JUDGMENT
BANK OF AMERICA N.A., FHLMC LBAC
173 a.k.a. FEDERAL HOME LOAN
MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FREDDIE
MAC), BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING
LP, BALBOA INSURANCE CO, BANK OF
AMERICA MORTGAGE, QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORP, HOME RETENTION
GROUP, DOES 2-40,
Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT

1

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUGED AND DECREED that judgment shall be and

2

hereby is entered as follows on the claims alleged by of Christopher D. Schneider (“Plaintiff”) in

3

the second amended complaint (Dkt. 91):

4

1.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) in accordance

5

with the jury’s verdict entered May 20, 2016 (Dkt. 291) on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA under

6

the Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act (“RESPA”).

7

2

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA, Federal Home Loan Mortgage

8

Corporation (“FHLMC”), and Balboa Insurance Company (“Balboa”) (collectively “Defendants”)

9

in accordance with the Court’s May 20, 2016 ruling granting Defendants’ motion under F.R.C.P.

10

50 (“Rule 50”) on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants under California Business & Professions

11

Code § 17200.

12

3.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 20,

13

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA under the Truth

14

In Lending Act (“TILA”).

15

4.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 19,

16

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA under the

17

California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“Rosenthal Act”).

18

5.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 19,

19

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA under

20

California Civil Code Section 2954.

21
22
23

6.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 19,

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA for fraud.
7.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 19,

24

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claim against BANA for breach of

25

contract.

26

8.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA and FHLMC in accordance with the

27

Court’s May 19, 2016 ruling granting BANA’s and FHLMC’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s

28

claims against these defendants for an accounting.
1
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT

1

9.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

2

19, 2016 ruling granting Defendants’ Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for

3

conversion.

4

10.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

5

19, 2016 ruling granting Defendants’ Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for

6

wrongful foreclosure.

7

11.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 19,

8

2016 ruling granting BANA’s Rule 50 motion on Plaintiff’s claims against BANA for breach of

9

the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

10

12.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Balboa and FHLMC in accordance with the

11

Court’s May 21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave

12

to amend the motions by Balboa and FHLMC under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)

13

(“Rule 12(b)(6)”) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against these defendants under RESPA.

14

13.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of FHLMC in accordance with the Court’s July 11,

15

2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the motion by FHLMC under Rule

16

12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against this defendant under TILA.

17

14.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of FHLMC in accordance with the Court’s July 11,

18

2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the motion by FHLMC under Rule

19

12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against this defendant under the Rosenthal Act and the Fair

20

Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).

21

15.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 21,

22

2014 order (Dkt. 132) granting without leave to amend the motion by BANA under Rule 12(b)(6)

23

to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against BANA under the FDCPA.

24

16.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Balboa and FHLMC in accordance with the

25

Court’s May 21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave

26

to amend the motions by Balboa and FHLMC under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims

27

against these defendants under California Civil Code § 2954.

28

17.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of FHMLC in accordance with the Court’s July 11,
2
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT

1

2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the motion by FHLMC under Rule

2

12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against FHLMC for fraud, negligent misrepresentation and

3

conspiracy.

4

18.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of BANA in accordance with the Court’s May 21,

5

2014 order (Dkt. 132) granting without leave to amend the motion by BANA under Rule 12(b)(6)

6

to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against BANA for negligent misrepresentation and conspiracy.

7

19.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Balboa and FHLMC in accordance with the

8

Court’s May 21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave

9

to amend the motion by Balboa and FHLMC under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims

10

against these defendants for breach of contract.

11

20.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

12

21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the

13

motion by Defendants under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for

14

declaratory relief.

15

21.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Balboa and FHLMC in accordance with the

16

Court’s May 21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave

17

to amend the motion by Balboa and FHLMC under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims

18

against these defendants for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

19

22.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

20

21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the

21

motion by Defendants under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for

22

negligence.

23

23.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

24

21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the

25

motion by Defendants under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants for

26

intentional infliction of emotional distress.

27

//

28

//
3
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT

1

24.

Against Plaintiff and in favor of Defendants in accordance with the Court’s May

2

21, 2014 order (Dkt. 132) and July 11, 2014 order (Dkt. 138) granting without leave to amend the

3

motion by Defendants under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants under

4

the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED

6
7
8
9

Dated: 6/1/2016

/s/ John A. Mendez
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT

1

Local Rule 137 Certificate

2

I, Leslie M. Werlin, declare:

3

1.

I am with the law firm of McGuireWoods, LLP counsel for defendants Bank of

4

America, N.A., Balboa Insurance Company and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation in this

5

action.

6

2.

On May 24, 2016, I sent an email to Michael Yesk, Esq., counsel for Plaintiff in

7

this matter (“Mr. Yesk”), with a copy of the proposed amended judgment sent forth above. A true

8

copy of that email showing the date and time of transmission is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”.

9

The email address used for Mr. Yesk is the same email I have used for prior email

10

communications to Mr. Yesk’s office. As of the end of the day on May 31, 2016 I had heard

11

nothing from Mr. Yesk regarding the attachment to my May 24, 2016.

12
13

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct: June 1, 2016 at
Los Angeles, California.

14
15
16

/s/Leslie M. Werlin
Leslie M. Werlin

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
[PROPOSED] AMENDED JUDGMENT