Judge: Keri G. Katz, Case: 37-2019-00062677-CU-FR-CTL, Date: 2023-12-22 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - December 21, 2023

12/22/2023  08:30:00 AM  C-74 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Keri Katz

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Fraud Demurrer / Motion to Strike 37-2019-00062677-CU-FR-CTL KAYE VS JP MORGAN CHASE NATIONAL CORPORATE SERVICES INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Demurrer The court addresses the evidentiary issues. Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s request for judicial notice is GRANTED as to items 1-8 and denied as to item 9.

The court then rules as follows. Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND.

The Second Amended Complaint alleges three causes of action against Chase for Fraud, Violation of Business & Professions Code § 17200 and Negligence. As with the First Amended Complaint the court finds all of the causes of action pled against Chase are jurisdictionally barred under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) [12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(13)(D)].

Pursuant to this subsection, . . . no court shall have jurisdiction over-- (i) any claim or action for payment from, or any action seeking a determination of rights with respect to, the assets of any depository institution for which the Corporation has been appointed receiver, including assets which the Corporation may acquire from itself as such receiver; or (ii) any claim relating to any act or omission of such institution or the Corporation as receiver.

Plaintiff again relies on Benson v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (9th Cir. 2012) 673 F.3d 1207 and again argues that the SAC alleges independently wrongful conduct by Chase. However, and significantly, Plaintiff fails to cite to any allegations of the SAC to support this argument. A review of the SAC shows that each of these causes of action is premised on the terms of Plaintiff's agreements with WaMu. As such, each of these causes of action is barred by the FIRREA defense. To the extent Plaintiff relies on allegations relating to the October 31, 2008, Chase press release, and/or unpled allegations relating to Plaintiff's efforts to obtain documentation from Chase in 2018, Plaintiff's arguments ignore that the damages alleged all arise out of Plaintiff's loan agreements with WaMu [SAC ¶¶ 95, 118, 119, 138].

Benson does not allow for a finding of independently wrongful conduct in these circumstances. Such claims are barred under FIRREA.

Although Plaintiff again seeks leave to amend, Plaintiff fails to proffer any facts to cure this pleading deficiency. Therefore, the court finds Plaintiff fails to demonstrate a reasonable probability the complaint can be amended to plead a basis for liability against Chase. Accordingly, Defendant JPMorgan Chase Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3046908  10 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  KAYE VS JP MORGAN CHASE NATIONAL CORPORATE SERVICES  37-2019-00062677-CU-FR-CTL Bank, N.A's demurrer is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Doe v. United States Youth Soccer Assn., Inc. (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 1118, 1143 citing Titus v. Canyon Lake Property Owners Assn. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 906, 917. See also, Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349; Ruinello v. Murray (1951) 36 Cal.2d 687, 690.

Defendant is ordered to submit a judgment of dismissal within 10 days of this ruling.

Motion to Strike In light of this court's ruling sustaining Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint without leave to amend, Chase's motion to strike Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint is moot.

If this tentative ruling is confirmed the Minute Order will be the final order of the court and the parties shall not submit any further order on this motion.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3046908  10