Sullivan v. Washington Mutual Bank FA et al

Filing 115

ORDER RESETTING CMC FOR 1/23/14 AT 10:30 AM. Case Management Statement due by 1/16/2014. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/23/2014 10:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 11/19/13. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/19/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

J. Brian McCauley (SBN 66762)
A Professional Law Corporation
[e-mail]
425 California Street, Suite 1700
San Francisco, California 94104
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
KATY SULLIVAN

6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
10
11

NORTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
KATY SULLIVAN, also known as KATY
MARIE SULLIVAN,
Plaintiff,

12
v.

13
14
15
16

WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA,
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, National
Association, BANK OF AMERICA,
National Association, CALIFORNIA
RECONVEYANCE COMPANY; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive Defendants.

Case No. CIV 09 2161 EMC
UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT ; ORDER CONTINUING CMC
Date: November 21, 2013
Time: 10:30 a.m.
Dept: 5 - 17th Floor
Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen
Action Filed:

4/22/09

17
18

TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT:

19

Defendants JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”), California Reconveyance

20

Company (“CRC”) and Bank of America, National Association, as successor by merger to

21

LaSalle Bank NA as trustee for WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2006-AR9

22

Trust (“B of A”) (together, “Defendants”), along with plaintiff Katy Sullivan

23

(“Plaintiff”)(collectively the “Parties”), hereby submit this Updated Joint Case Management

24

Statement.

25

1.

26

Jurisdiction and Service
Plaintiff has named the following as defendants: WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA,

27

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, National Association, BANK OF AMERICA, National

28

Association, LASALLE BANK, National Association, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE

UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

1

COMPANY; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive.

2

This court has jurisdiction, because Plaintiff, in the initial complaint, alleges violations of

3

the Federal Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”). (See Second Amended Complaint.)

4

2.

5

Status of the Case and Changes Since Previous Joint Statement:
Plaintiff seeks statutory damages under TILA, as well as general damages. Plaintiff also

6

seeks rescission under TILA. According to Plaintiff, Defendants failed to make certain

7

disclosures required under the TILA at the time the subject loan was issued to Plaintiff, and

8

thereafter. Plaintiff also contends that Defendants falsely represented the nature of the subject

9

loan. Defendants deny these allegations and contend that they did not participate in the

10

origination process which is the subject of Plaintiff’s legal action. Plaintiffs and Defendants

11

entered into a conditional settlement, part of which involved a loan modification, the terms of

12

which were established pending Plaintiff's submission of a loan modification application and

13

income verification. During this process, Plaintiff lost her job, but was successful in finding new

14

employment. Her disclosure materials were again been provided to Defendants and all parties

15

believe that the settlement may now proceed. Defendants have provided a set of settlement

16

documents (which are to include the new refinancing or loan modification documents), and those

17

documents are being revised in response to certain limited comment/requests by Plaintiff. Due to

18

the size of the concerned parties and the relative complexity of the documents, they are

19

unavoidably still in the drafting process.

20

A.

21

Defendants may bring a motion for summary judgment pursuant to FRCP 56.

22

B.

23

The parties have exchanged limited written discovery, however such discovery is

24

currently stayed pending the settlement. Discovery, as a result, is not pending as to do so would

25

be to expend attorney’s fees hopefully unnecessarily.

Motions:

Discovery:

26

C.

27

The parties did reach a settlement, conditioned on a loan modification, which, as stated

28

Settlement and ADR:

above, is in the drafting process and review by the concerned departments of defendants after
2
UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

1

review by Plaintiff. All parties believe that the settlement is positioned to go forward; as would

2

be expected, it is conditioned on the loan modification documents being readied and in recordable

3

form.

4

Both parties request a further, thirty (30) day extension to allow Defendants to finalize

5

documentation for the already-negotiated settlement. On completion and execution of the

6

documentation, this action is to be dismissed.

7

Respectfully submitted,

8
9

ALVARADOSMITH
A Professional Corporation

DATED: November 19, 2013

10
11

By: /s/ Theodore E. Bacon
THEODORE E. BACON

12

Attorneys for Defendants

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE
COMPANY and BANK OF AMERICA,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as successor
by merger to LaSalle Bank NA as trustee for
WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
Series 2006-AR9 Trust

13
14
15
16
17

DATED: November 19, 2013

18

By: /s/ J. Brian McCauley
J. BRIAN MCCAULEY, ESQ..
Attorneys for Plaintiff,
KATY SULLIVAN

19
20
21

RT
U
O

26

NO

RT

27

ERED
O ORD D
IT IS S
DIFIE
AS MO
dward M

Judge E

ER

A

H

28

. Chen

LI

25

UNIT
ED

S

24

R NIA

23

IT IS SO ORDERED that the further CMC is reset from 11/21/13 to 1/23/14
at 10:30 a.m. An updated joint CMC Statement shall be filed by 1/16/14.
_________________
Edward M. ChenTES DISTRICT
C
TA
U.S. District Judge

FO

22

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

3
UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT