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.

Taxation
Finance
California's Unfair Competition Law

George W. Woolley, Tammy S. Woolley, Anthony Look Jr., Kimberly Look, Alejandro Marcey, Felicia Marcey, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Ygrene Energy Fund Inc. and Ygrene Energy Fund Florida LLC

Published: Nov. 13, 2020 | Result Date: Oct. 15, 2020 |

Case number: 3:17-cv-01258-LB Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Laurel D. Beeler

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jaclyn L. Anderson
(Kasdan, Lippsmith, Weber & Turner LLP)


Defendant

Fredrick S. Levin
(Buckley LLP)

Ali M. Abugheida
(Buckley LLP)

Michael Rome
(Buckley LLP)


Facts

Plaintiffs Tammy and George Woolley obtained financing for a home improvement project through Florida's Property Assessed Clean Energy program. The PACE program allows homeowners to finance energy efficient and clean energy home improvements through the property tax system. Before signing their PACE financing agreement, Plaintiffs alleged that they were told that PACE obligations are transferrable in connection with a future sale or refinancing and that they were not adequately advised that they may be required to pay off their PACE assessment in full in the event of a sale or refinancing.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended that defendant's description of PACE assessments as transferrable was false and that they were not adequately advised that they may be required to pay off their PACE assessment in full in the event of a sale or refinancing.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendants denied plaintiffs' contentions. Defendants contended that PACE obligations are transferrable and, in any event, defendants repeatedly and accurately advised plaintiffs of the possibility that they may be required to pay off their PACE assessment in full in the event of a sale or refinancing.

Result

The district court granted defendants' motion for summary judgment because describing PACE obligations as transferrable is not fraudulent or deceptive and because defendants' written disclosures were not fraudulent or deceptive.

Other Information

The court's decision was solely as to the Woolleys' claims, adjudicating the Florida claims only. The California claims have not been summarily adjudicated and are proceeding.


#136022

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

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