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
Wrongful Foreclosure
Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing

Frank Acuna, Leonard Scott Fineberg v. Quicken Loans Inc., New Rez LLC, National Deault Servicing Corporation, and Does 1-10, inclusive

Published: May 7, 2021 | Result Date: Apr. 19, 2021 | Filing Date: Feb. 4, 2020 |

Case number: 2:19-cv-10056-MCS-KS Bench Decision –  Defense

Judge

Mark C. Scarsi

Court

CD CA


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Douglas E. Klein
(Hutton, Madgett & Klein, APLC )


Defendant

James G. Snell
(Perkins Coie LLP)

Thomas N. Abbott
(Perkins Coie LLP)

Ofunne N. Edoziem
(Perkins Coie LLP)


Facts

Plaintiffs Frank A. Acuna and Leonard Scott Fineberg filed suit against Defendant Quicken Loans Inc., after foreclosure proceedings were brought against Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs asserted claims for wrongful foreclosure, negligence, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violations of Business & Professions Code Section 17200, and violations of the Homeowner Bill of Rights. Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, abandoning their causes of action for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and wrongful foreclosure. They added new claims for declaratory relief and rescission under the Truth in Lending Act.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs contended Defendant Quicken Loans failed to properly apply loan payments and forged their signatures on the loan documents. In particular, Plaintiffs contended Defendant Quicken Loans issued a $417,000 mortgage loan secured by the Property, but Defendant Fineberg conducted numerous changes and ultimately modified the original Deed of Trust at the loan closing on August 27, 2015. Plaintiffs further contended Defendant Quicken Loans created an entirely new Deed of Trust that contained artificial and robo signatures for the purposes of recording against the Property.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied Plaintiffs' contentions, and argued Plaintiffs were previous homeowners who defaulted on their home loan, and thus only filed action to obtain a free home and disrupt their lender's attempts to recover the owed debt. Defendant contended Plaintiff Acuna borrowed approximately $400,000.00 from Quicken Loans, defaulted on his loan a few years later, and it wasn't until Quicken Loans initiated foreclosure proceedings against the home, that caused Acuna to pursue legal action. Defendant argued that Plaintiffs' TILA claim was barred by the statute of limitations. Defendant moved to dismiss the remaining claims for various other reasons.

Result

The court ruled in favor of Defendant and dismissed the case.


#137058

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

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