This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Real Property
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Foreclosure

Erika Kaneko, Sabine M. Kaneko v. Aram Arakelyan, Jin Chao, Kenneth Park, Hambardzum Talaryan, Countrywide Home Loans, Litton Loan Servicing L.P., S&H Financial Group Inc., The Bank of New York

Published: Jul. 7, 2009 | Result Date: Mar. 3, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC355462 Bench Decision –  Defense

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

John C. Torjesen


Defendant

Wonsub Shim

Jerry K. Staub

Edward J. Blum


Facts

In 2002, IndyMac Bank began foreclosure on Erika Kaneko's property due to delinquency in her first trust deed payments. Hambarzdum Talaryan acquired ownership of the deed and cleared the foreclosure with a loan from Countrywide Home Loans. Later, Talaryan deeded the property back to Kaneko. The Countrywide loan went into default. Aram Arakelyan had loaned Talaryan the down payment and received payment when Countrywide's loan funded. Kenneth Park, Jin Cho, and S&H Financial Group loaned additional funds to Kaneko to clear up the defaults. Later, Countrywide foreclosed the property. Kaneko sued Arakelyan, Talaryan, Litton Loan Servicing, Park, Cho, S&H Financial, The Bank of New York, and Countrywide, alleging, among other claims, usury, violation of state mortgage statutes, and breach of fiduciary duty.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Kaneko alleged that the foreclosure caused her to lose equity in the home.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Arakelyan claimed that Kaneko understood the transactions and benefited from being able to stay in the home.

Result

The court found in favor of the defense based upon the fact that the transaction was illegal and that all parties understood that fact. Plaintiffs were found not to be damaged.


#108756

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390