Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Carino v. Standard Pacific Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 15, 2010

DENA CRISOTOMO CARINO; ALLAN CHRISTOPHER DIWA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STANDARD PACIFIC CORP.; STANDARD PACIFIC MORTGAGE, INC. FKA FAMILY HOME LENDING, INC.; CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC; ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Frank C. Damrell, Jr. United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on defendants Standard Pacific Corporation and Standard Pacific Mortgage, Inc.'s motion to compel arbitration and stay the case pending arbitration.*fn1 In this action, plaintiffs Dena Carino and Allan Diwa ("plaintiffs") allege fourteen claims for relief against moving defendants, among others,*fn2 premised on the allegation that the loans plaintiffs obtained from defendants were procured as part of a purported scheme of securitization of risky mortgage loans. (FAC, filed July 20, 2009.) Plaintiffs seek by this action to rescind the loans and quiet title to their residential property by suing their lenders, their mortgage broker and the developer of the subject property, alleging claims against defendants for federal truth and lending violations, civil RICO violations, negligence, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress and unfair business practices.

Plaintiffs filed a response to the motion, stating they did not oppose the motion and conceding that the subject Agreements required arbitration of the instant dispute. (Docket #15.) As such, the court HEREBY grants defendants' motion to compel arbitration. This case is now STAYED pending the parties' arbitration.*fn3 The parties are directed to inform the court of the outcome of the arbitration within 20 days of the arbitrator's decision.

The pending motion to dismiss (Docket # 4, 7) is DENIED as MOOT. Defendants may re-notice the motion, if appropriate, when the stay of this case is lifted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.