This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 02/15/2021 at 00:11:14 (UTC).

ALEXANDER LU VS RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC

Case Summary

On 06/12/2017 ALEXANDER LU filed a Property - Other Real Property lawsuit against RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Burbank Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are LAURA A. MATZ and CURTIS A. KIN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6657

  • Filing Date:

    06/12/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Real Property

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Burbank Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

LAURA A. MATZ

CURTIS A. KIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

LU ALEXANDER

LU AN INDIVIDUAL ALEXANDER

Defendants

RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC

BANK OF AMERICA NAITONAL ASSOCIATION A UNITED STATES CORPORATION

DITECH FINANCIAL LLC

BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION A UNITED STATES CORPORATION

DITECH FINANCIAL LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

MTGLQ INVESTORS LP A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMINTED LIABILITY COMPANY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

VOKSHORI LAW GROUP

VOKSHORI NIMA STEPHEN

Defendant Attorneys

MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS LLP

COUTTS MELISSA ROBBINS

ABBOTT THOMAS NATHANIEL

BRITT STEPHEN

BIDERMAN DAVID

 

Court Documents

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

1/17/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Opposition - OPPOSITION SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

12/9/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION SUPPLEMENTAL OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Objection - OBJECTION PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO BANK OF AMERICA'S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE AND MOTION TO STRIKE

12/9/2019: Objection - OBJECTION PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO BANK OF AMERICA'S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE AND MOTION TO STRIKE

Answer

11/13/2019: Answer

Declaration - DECLARATION OF THOMAS N. ABBOTT IN RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO APPEAR AT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

11/20/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF THOMAS N. ABBOTT IN RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SANCTIONS FOR FAILURE TO APPEAR AT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW)

6/20/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW)

Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

6/6/2019: Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

Proof of Service by Mail

4/26/2019: Proof of Service by Mail

Notice - NOTICE OF OSC

6/12/2017: Notice - NOTICE OF OSC

Case Management Statement

4/19/2019: Case Management Statement

Request for Judicial Notice

3/29/2019: Request for Judicial Notice

Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

3/29/2019: Demurrer - without Motion to Strike

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: Complaint filed-Summons Issued

6/12/2017: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: Complaint filed-Summons Issued

Summons

6/12/2017: Summons

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

11/3/2017: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Minute Order - Minute order entered: 2018-08-08 00:00:00

8/8/2018: Minute Order - Minute order entered: 2018-08-08 00:00:00

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

1/28/2019: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Ex Parte Application -

8/8/2018: Ex Parte Application -

83 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/13/2021
  • Hearing09/13/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department E at 600 East Broadway, Glendale, CA 91206; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2021
  • Hearing09/02/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department E at 600 East Broadway, Glendale, CA 91206; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department E, Curtis A. Kin, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2021
  • Docketat 2:00 PM in Department E, Curtis A. Kin, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department E, Curtis A. Kin, Presiding; Non-Appearance Case Review

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Non-Appearance Case Review)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketStipulation and Order (Joint Stipulation For Order To Continue Trial And [Proposed] Order); Filed by RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, a California Liminted Liability Company (Defendant); MTGLQ Investors, LP, a Delaware Limited Partnership (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Non-Appearance Case Review) of 10/09/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/26/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department E, Curtis A. Kin, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/26/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Case Management Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
119 More Docket Entries
  • 07/25/2017
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/25/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by RUSHMORE LOAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketNotice (of OSC)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketSummons Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: EC066657    Hearing Date: December 12, 2019    Dept: E

DEMURRER

[CCP §430.10 et. seq.]

Case: Alexander Lu v. Rushmore Loan Management Services, LLC (EC 066657)

Defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s (“BANA”) Demurrer to Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

The Court has reluctantly considered plaintiff’s late-filed “Supplemental Opposition,” which was filed without leave of Court and after the demurrer had been fully briefed. Indeed, plaintiff made the strategic decision simply to oppose the demurrer initially on the ground that BANA’s brief was over the page limit set forth in CRC Rule 3.1113(d). Ultimately acknowledging the folly of that position one day before the initially scheduled hearing on the demurrer (see 12/5/19 Coplan Decl.), plaintiff thereafter filed the Supplemental Opposition merely three days before the instant hearing, leaving virtually no time for BANA to submit a reply. Plaintiff is hereby warned that, in the future, the Court may decline to consider filings not made in accordance with the rules and statutes that govern this litigation.

On the merits, the Court finds that the new allegations of the SAC fail to sufficiently correct the deficiencies previously noted in this Court’s August 16, 2019 minute order sustaining the demurrer to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), including the bar of the statute of limitations, as well as the judicial estoppel and res judicata bars flowing from plaintiff’s bankruptcy, bankruptcy proceedings and filings, and bankruptcy discharge. The SAC’s new allegations concerning a scheme pursuant to which BANA is sought to be held responsible for Rushmore’s conduct from 2016 onward (after BANA is alleged to have transferred all interest in the Note, Deed of Trust and subject property to MTGLQ Investors LP, as is expressly permitted under the DOT), are insufficient to create BANA’s vicarious responsibility for those co-defendants’ alleged wrongdoing. In this regard, it is noteworthy that the purportedly conspiratorial act in which BANA is alleged to have engaged, namely, “with[olding] the terms of the Loan Modification Agreement from MTLGQ/RUSHMORE” (SAC ¶ 37) is flatly inconsistent with conspiring with or knowingly aiding and abetting those entities to harm plaintiff.

Because plaintiff has failed in the SAC to correct the deficiencies of the FAC, despite being permitted to do so, and because plaintiff has failed in his Supplemental Opposition to meet the burden of demonstrating how the SAC could be amended to cure it of the repeated defects, the demurrer is now sustained without leave to amend.

Defendant BANA’s Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED in part. The Court has taken judicial notice of the existence of the subject documents in the Court file, but not the truth of hearsay allegations contained therein, except in connection with certain exceptions as enumerated in Day v. Sharp (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 904, 914, including the effect of Court orders. The Court has considered the absence of material in the documents to the extent permissible in connection with arguments that inconsistent positions have been taken and judicial estoppel may apply.

Defendant BANA shall submit an appropriate proposed order of dismissal.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where MTGLQ Investors, LP is a litigant

Latest cases where Rushmore Loan Management Service LLC is a litigant

Latest cases where Ditech Financial LLC is a litigant

Latest cases where Bank of America is a litigant