Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Katy Sullivan, Also Known As Katy Marie Sullivan v. Washington Mutual Bank

March 2, 2011

KATY SULLIVAN, ALSO KNOWN AS KATY MARIE SULLIVAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Edward M. Chen

MITH S C ORPORATION NGELES LVARADO ROFESSIONAL A OS L

UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT ; ORDER RESETTING CMC

DATE: March 9, 2011

TIME: 2:30 p.m. C RTRM C Action Filed: April 22, 2009

TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT:

Defendants JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("JPMorgan"), California Reconveyance Company ("CRC") and Bank of America, National Association, as successor by merger to LaSalle Bank NA 4 as trustee for WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2006-AR9 Trust ("B of A") (together, "Defendants"), along with plaintiff Katy Sullivan ("Plaintiff")(collectively the "Parties"), 6 hereby submit this Updated Joint Case Management Statement.

1. Jurisdiction and Service

Plaintiff has named the following as defendants: WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA, JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, National Association,BANK OF AMERICA, National Association, LASALLE BANK, National Association, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive.

This court has jurisdiction, because Plaintiff, in the initial complaint, alleges violations of the Federal Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"). (See Second Amended Complaint.)

2. Status of the Case and Changes Since Previous Joint Statement:

Plaintiff seeks statutory damages under TILA, as well as general damages. Plaintiff also

seeks rescission under TILA. According to Plaintiff, Defendants failed to make certain disclosures required under the TILA at the time the subject loan was issued to Plaintiff, and thereafter. Plaintiff 18 also contends that Defendants falsely represented the nature of the subject loan. Defendants deny 19 these allegations and contend that they did not participate in the origination process which is the 20 subject of Plaintiff's legal action.

LVARADO C ROFESSIONAL MITHS ORPORATION NGELES ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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