FEDERAL APPEAL ARGUMENT SET IN WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE CASE AGAINST WELLS FARGO

THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAS SET ORAL ARGUMENT IN KAKARALA V. WELLS FARGO, ET AL., A CASE WHERE WELLS FARGO LOST  THE BATTLE TO REMAND A CASE ALLEGING WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE BACK TO STATE COURT

In this case, Vince Rabago Law Office successfully won an order to remand the state law claims in this case back to state court for a trial.  The District Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to reconsider the court’s initial order dismissing the entire case, and ordered a remand of the Plaintiff’s state claims back to state court.

Wells Fargo appealed the case to the federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the initial order to dismiss the case should be re-instated.  Vince Rabago Law Office also represents the Plaintiff on appeal in federal court in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and will be appearing in San Francisco on August 13, 2015 to argue that the District Court’s judgment should be upheld.  The issues involve removal and remand questions, as well as belated claims of diversity jurisdiction raised by the bank in a last desperate attempt to end the case without giving the Plaintiff her day in court in front of a jury.  The Plaintiff’s appellate answering brief in the Ninth Circuit can be seen here.

Among other cases, Vince Rabago Law Office is also representing Elva Damian in a lawsuit against CitiMortgage, Inc., CitiBank NA, FannieMae, CR Title Services Inc., and former Arizona notary Stephanie Abcede in Case CR20130-0048, in Pima County Superior Court.  The lawsuit alleges various claims against different defendants, including negligent undertaking related to a loan modification, negligent misrepresentation, wrongful foreclosure, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, aiding and abetting, notary fraud, etc., among other claims, all related in some fashion to the alleged wrongful foreclosure of Plaintiff Elva Damian’s home in late 2010.

The lawsuit includes allegations that CitiMortgage engaged in a negligent undertaking in reference to a loan modification, and negligent misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, among other things.  The lawsuit alleges that CitiMortgage sent a letter giving Damian until January 5, 2011 to send in documents related to a loan modification, but wrongfully foreclosed and sold Ms. Damian’s home just days after Christmas on December 27, 2010.  The lawsuit also alleges that it was later discovered that the notary involved in the foreclosure was later suspended by the State of Arizona for falsely notarizing foreclosure documents in other foreclosures, including the same person who was also listed and notarized on documents in Ms. Damian’s foreclosure.  Public records from the Arizona Secretary of State seem to suggest that multiple CR Title notaries may have engaged in similar alleged wrongful conduct. (See Public records 1 Public records 2 Public records 3 Public Records 4 Public records 5 Public records 6 Public Records 7 Public records 8 – broken down from one document, due to size.) The lawsuit further alleges that false documents or concealment occurred because subsequently recorded foreclosure sale documents stated that it was Fannie Mae who had been the foreclosing entity, whereas previously recorded documents listed CitiMortgage as the foreclosing beneficiary.  Among other things, the lawsuit also alleges that CR Title unlawfully violated state foreclosure laws by contracting with out of state companies to conduct what are considered non-delegable trustee duties, such as posting foreclosure notices (ostensibly done by companies such as Priority Posting and Publishing of Tustin, CA).  Unresolved thus far is also the issue of what legal authority CR Title even had to act as foreclosure trustee in Arizona based on statements it made in its publicly recorded documents claiming that it was authorized to do so under ARS 33-803 (A)(5) and that it was federally regulated by the Comptroller of the Currency, as there is no apparent information online through the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency that CR Title is  federally regulated by the OCC.  The lawsuit can be seen here and the attached exhibits here.

To date, Vince Rabago Law Office has successfully fought to have the case remanded back to state court after the defendants removed it to federal court, and Vince Rabago Law Office has successfully defeated motions to dismiss filed by all of the defendants.  The case has been pending since early 2013, and a second amended complaint was filed in late 2014.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *