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.

Contracts
Breach of Contract
Constructive Fraud

Donna Ruth O'Connor-Rose v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Published: Aug. 9, 2014 | Result Date: Feb. 10, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:12-cv-00225-WBS-CMK Summary Judgment –  Defense

Facts

On Dec. 2, 2005, Donna O'Connor Rose obtained a mortgage loan from J.P. Morgan Chase N.A. secured by property in Redding. The deed of trust authorized JP Morgan to require payment in the event of a default and to collect fees from her. Between June 1, 2006 and Dec. 31, 2008, Rose incurred 16 late payment charges. She recorded default, but later rescinded a notice of default on Dec. 15, 2009. Although she was able to cure the debt, she incurred more charges in 2010.

On Aug. 17, 2011, JP Morgan sent Rose a letter informing her that there was $1,009 in a suspense account, and that she could pay a loan payment she missed for September 2011 by sending $1,585, the difference between the due payment and what was in the suspense account. When she submitted payments for the next several months, JP used those payments to satisfy the previous month's balance, and she remained delinquent on her loan. Later, she sued JP Morgan.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged breach of contract and constructive fraud against JP Morgan. She alleged that defendant sent her a false notice of intent to foreclose when she was current on her loan and that even allowing for late payments, defendant did not give credit for certain payments made in order to bring her up to date on her payments. Therefore, plaintiff claimed that defendant included several wrongful late charges, foreclosure fees and so forth.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant argued that the plaintiff had not performed and was in breach of the deed of trust and note due to her default. Also, it claimed that it did not breach the terms of the agreement and that plaintiff's payments were accounted for. Defendant claimed that it was entitled to summary judgment in that plaintiff could not show that she suffered damage due to defendant's actions.

Result

Finding that defendant correctly applied plaintiff's payments from July 2011 onward to her account, her payments from September 2011 onward were untimely, and she was in default on her loan when she filed the lawsuit, the district court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Other Information

FILING DATE: Jan. 27, 2012.


#116330

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

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