Sullivan v. Washington Mutual Bank FA et al

Filing 129

ORDER RESETTING Order to Show Cause Hearing from 10/9/14 to Tuesday 11/4/2014 02:30 PM. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/6/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/6/2014)

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 JOINT RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND EXTENSION REQUEST Date: October 9, 2014 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 (“Plaintiff”) 23 (collectively the “Parties”), hereby submit this Joint Response to Order to Show Cause and 24 Extension Request. 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 3962935.1 -- AL109.W383 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 Settlement 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 11 12 13 14 15 origination process which is the subject of Plaintiff’s legal action. Plaintiffs owns a 2 unit condominium. Plaintiff and Defendants have arrived at a conditional settlement which contemplates the following: 1) Plaintiff will deed one of the condo units to Defendant, which will then be sold and the proceeds paid to Defendant, 2) Plaintiff will retain the other unit, and Defendant has agreed to modify the existing 16 loan such that the security for that loan will consist solely of a line on the unit retained by 17 Plaintiff. 18 At the last hearing, the parties have relayed that they had agreed on principal terms of 19 required Amendments to the Condominium CC&Rs, substitutions of trustees on the first deed and 20 trust and HELOC held by Defendants, a form Deed of Partial Reconveyance and a Settlement 21 Agreement, and that there might be some final revisions to those documents. The parties had also 22 investigated what will be required to insure title on the two units in light of this transaction, and 23 have obtained and exchanged documents that will be required by title companies. What was 24 expected to be the parties’ final documentation was exchanged, and a last revision was seen to be 25 necessary, pertaining to the manner of a retention of jurisdiction and performance by all, so that a 26 dismissal can be entered which retained appropriate jurisdiction and power in the Court to move 27 the settlement forward if ambiguity or unforeseen difficulty might crop up for either side. 28 Revised documentation is being exchanged virtually contemporaneously with this 2 UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT 3962935.1 -- AL109.W383 1 Extension Request; considering advice from the Court’s staff, it is believed by the parties hereto 2 that an extension of the Order to Show Cause hearing of twenty-one (21) days is prudent and 3 requested, so as to keep the urgency to complete this documentation in place but to avoid 4 unnecessary imposition on the Court’s calendar. 5 Accordingly, it is jointly requested that this Court set over its current Order to Show 6 Cause appearance for three weeks, for the reasons stated hereinabove. In the event that such 7 extension is not acceptable for whatever reason, the parties respectfully submit this Joint 8 Response for the upcoming October 9 Order to Show Cause. 9 Respectfully submitted, 10 11 ALVARADOSMITH A Professional Corporation DATED: October 2, 2014 12 13 By: /s/ Theodore E. Bacon THEODORE E. BACON 14 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 15 16 17 18 19 DATED: October 2, 2014 20 By: /s/ J. Brian McCauley J. BRIAN MCCAULEY, ESQ.. Attorneys for Plaintiff, KATY SULLIVAN 21 22 RT Judge Ed H ER . Chen ward M FO NO 26 R NIA ED ORDER IT IS SO DIFIED AS MO LI UNIT ED 25 S DISTRICT TE C TA RT U O S 24 IT IS SO ORDERED that the OSC is reset for Tuesday 11/4/14 at 2:30 p.m. ___________________________ Edward M. Chen U.S. District Judge A 23 N F D IS T IC T O R C 27 28 3 UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT 3962935.1 -- AL109.W383

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?