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)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 J. Brian McCauley (SBN 66762) A Professional Law Corporation 425 California Street, Suite 1700 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415)974-1515 Facsimile: (415)543-0125 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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?