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.

Norlito Soriano v. Countrywide Home Loans

May 4, 2011

NORLITO SORIANO,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.,
SOLIDHOMES FUNDING, MANUEL CHAVEZ, MARK FLORES, SOLIDHOMES ENTERPRENEURS, INC.,
BANK OF AMERICA CORP., AND DOES 5-100,
DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lucy H. Koh United States District Judge

ORDER ADDRESSING VARIOUS PRETRIAL ISSUES

United States District Court For the Northern District of California

Code § 17200 et seq.)have survived summary judgment. See Dkt. No. 59, April 11, 2011 Order.

The parties have been ordered to attend a settlement conference with the Honorable Ronald Whyte 23 on May 11, 2011. Before the pretrial conference, the parties raised a number of issues relating to 24 the scope of the case and the matters to be decided at trial. The Court addresses those issues here. 25

The Court assumes familiarity with the statement of facts and background set forth in its Order on 26 summary judgment, and does not restate them here.

Case No.: 09-CV-02415-LHK

ORDER ADDRESSING VARIOUS PRETRIAL ISSUES

Plaintiff's claims for violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA", U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.) and violation of California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL," Bus. & Prof.

Trial in this case is set for June 6, 2011, and a pretrial conference will be held on May 4, 2011.

I. Plaintiff's Request for Reconsideration Regarding Emotional Distress Damages on Plaintiff's claim for emotional distress damages arising from the asserted RESPA violation.

Plaintiff did not file a timely opposition to the summary judgment motion. After the time for 5 filling an opposition had passed, Plaintiff requested leave to file a late opposition, which the Court 6 granted. In opposing the motion for summary adjudication of the damages available based on his Plaintiff asks the Court for reconsideration of its Order granting summary judgment to CHL RESPA claim, Plaintiff argued that "[i]f Defendants had properly corrected the loan servicing 8 error, [Plaintiff] would not have incurred increased mortgage payments . . . [Plaintiff] remains 9 liable for . . . emotional distress, $250,000.00." Opp'n to Summary Judgment Motion (Dkt. 55) at RESPA violation by itself, but instead claimed emotional distress damages due to the increase in his mortgage payments. See Dkt. No. 54. In the summary judgment Order, the Court held that "Plaintiff cannot claim that the insufficient response to the QWR [Qualified Written Request], in 14 and of itself, caused his loan payments to rise, directly caused his emotional distress resulting from 15 the rising charges, or directly damaged his credit. Plaintiff has failed to introduce any evidence to 16 show that 'some colorable relationship between his injury and the actions or omissions that 17 allegedly violated RESPA' exists." April 11, 2011 Order at 23-27 (citing Allen v. United Fin. 18

Court concluded that the only disputed fact Plaintiff had identified regarding available damages for 20 his RESPA claim was whether he was entitled to the attorney's fees he incurred when his attorney 21 followed up with CHL after CHL failed to respond to the September 20, 2007 QWR.

14. Thus, Plaintiff did not argue that any emotional distress damages were due to the alleged Mortg. Corp., No. 09-2507 SC, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS ...


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.