United States District Court, N.D. California
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (Docket No. 6).
CLAUDIA WILKEN, District Judge.
Defendant New Canaan Investments, LLC moves to dismiss Plaintiff Greg Gale's complaint for fraudulent transfer. Mr. Gale has filed an opposition, and New Canaan has filed a reply. Having considered the papers, the Court GRANTS New Canaan's motion to dismiss.
I. Request for Judicial Notice
New Canaan asks that the Court take judicial notice of several documents. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice (RFJN), Docket Nos. 7, 17 and 20, Exs. A-O. Mr. Gale opposes this request, in its entirety, for failure to demonstrate that judicial notice is appropriate and because New Canaan relies on the veracity of the facts found in the documents rather than only the existence of the documents. "[A] court may take judicial notice of matters of public record." Sami v. Wells Fargo Bank, 2012 WL 967051, at *4 (N.D. Cal.) (citation omitted). "As a general rule, we may not consider any material beyond the pleadings in ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.... More specifically, we may not, on the basis of evidence outside of the Complaint, take judicial notice of facts favorable to Defendants that could reasonably be disputed." United States v. Corinthian Colleges, 655 F.3d 984, 998-99 (9th Cir. 2011).
Exhibit A is a copy of the May 6, 2004 judgment against Mr. Gale. Mr. Gale refers to the judgment in Compl. ¶ 10. Hence, it is appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibit B is a copy of the December 10, 2013 Acknowledgment of the Assignment of Judgment between the Davises and New Canaan. Mr. Gale refers to this transaction many times in the Complaint. Hence, it is appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibits C and D are copies of excerpts of Mrs. Davis's December 11, 2013 bankruptcy filing in the Central District of California. Plaintiff refers to this filing in Compl. ¶ 18. Hence, they are appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibits E through H are copies of documents filed in the Napa County Superior Court in relation to a February 14, 2014 first amended complaint for fraudulent transfer filed by Mr. Gale against New Canaan. While Mr. Gale does not refer to these documents in his Complaint, the documents are a matter of public record and are relevant to the issue of whether collateral estoppel applies in this case. Hence, they are appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibits I and J are copies of filings made by Mr. Gale in the Bankruptcy Court of the Central District of California. These documents request permission to bring avoidance claims against New Canaan and its attorney on behalf of Mrs. Davis's bankruptcy estate. These documents are a matter of public record. Hence, they are appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibits K and L are copies of documents related to the appointment of a trustee over Mrs. Davis's bankruptcy estate. These documents are a matter of public record. Hence, they are appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibit M is a copy of an August 1, 2014 complaint filed by Mr. Gale in the Bankruptcy Court of the Central District of California requesting that Mrs. Davis's bankruptcy discharge be denied due to the alleged fraudulent transfer. This document is a matter of public record. Hence it is appropriate for judicial notice.
Exhibits N and O are excerpts taken from Exhibit M. They are duplicative and, hence, need not be judicially noticed.
Mr. Gale requests that the Court take notice of a copy of a document which purports to show that, on March 28, 2014, Mrs. Davis listed the judgment against Mr. Gale in her husband's probate estate at a value of $52, 500. Declaration of Richard Moody, Docket No. 15-1, Ex. A. This document is a matter of public record. Hence, it is appropriate for judicial notice.
The following facts are taken from the complaint and documents of which the ...