The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED.
Defendant?s Request For Judicial Notice is GRANTED as to items A-G, inclusive. Such notice is limited to the existence of, filing/recording of, and the legal effect of such instruments, pleadings, and court records, but not as to the truth of any disputed factual matter therein.
Waiver: Plaintiff failed to file any Opposition to this motion. The failure to support a claim with reasoned argument, and citation to authority can be treated as a waiver. Moulton Niguel Water Dist. v. Colombo (2003) 111 Cal.App.4th 1210, 1215.
Judicial Estoppel (Bankruptcy). Plaintiff?s failure to list her claims against Defendants in her bankruptcy filings or to contest the validity of the subject debt, judicially estops her from pursuing this action. (See RJN D & E).
In Hamilton v. Greenwich Investors XXVI, LLC (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1602, 1609, the court applied doctrines of equitable and judicial estoppel to find a debtor’s failure to disclose a lender liability claim in chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings precluded the debtor from later litigating the claim.?
On the First Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2923.6(a), Plaintiff failed to state a cause of action, because Defendant does not have an affirmative duty to give Plaintiff a loan modification.
On the Second Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2923.7, Plaintiff failed to state a cause of action, because the statute applies only mortgage loan servicers, not lenders.
On the Third Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2923.9, Plaintiff failed to state a cause of action, because Plaintiff failed to plead the elements of the cause of action.
On the Fourth Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2924.10, because Plaintiff failed to plead the elements of the cause of action.
On the Fifth Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2924.17, because Plaintiff failed to plead the elements of the cause of action.
On the Sixth Cause of Action For Violation of Civ. Code ? 2924.18, Plaintiff failed to plead the elements of the cause of action.
On the Seventh Cause of Action For Breach of The Implied Covenant of Good Faith & Fair Dealing, there is no duty to modify an existing contract, even if the parties initiate negotiations, thus there is no requirement to negotiate in good faith. Racine & Laramie v. Dept. Of Parks & Recreation (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 1026, 1031-32.? The implied covenant is limited to existing contractual relationships. Ibid, 1032.
On the Eighth Cause of Action For Violation of Bus & Prof. Code ? 17200, Plaintiff is admittedly in default of her obligations to repay the Loan.? Therefore, none of the acts by the Defendants as alleged the Complaint concerning the pending foreclosure were the cause of Plaintiff?s claimed economic harm, the loss of her home to foreclosure.? Jenkins v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.(2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 497.
On the Ninth Cause of Action For Promissory Estoppel, Plaintiff failed to specifically plead all facts relied on to establish its elements.? Smith v. San Francisco (1990) 225 Cal. App. 3d 38, 47. Conclusory allegations the party reasonably and justifiably relied on the promise are insufficient.? Id.? Plaintiff failed to allege the elements of promissory estoppel are: (i) A clear and unambiguous promise; (ii) Plaintiff?s reasonable and foreseeable reliance: (iii) Defendant?s failure to perform; and (iv) Injury to Plaintiff as a result of the reliance. Thompson v. International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Moving Picture Machine Operators (1964) 232 Cal.App.2d 446.
On the Tenth Cause of Action For Injunctive Relief, Injunctive relief is a remedy, not a cause of action. Guessous v. Chrome Hearts, LLC (2009) 183 Cal.App.4th1177, 1187.
Because the foreclosure sale has already occurred, the Plaintiff is not entitled to injunctive relief under the HBOR causes of action. (RJN F, Civ. Code ? 2924.12(b)). None of the remaining causes of action are adequately alleged, thus they cannot support injunctive relief either.