Makreas v. First National Bank
856 F. Supp. 2d 1097
N.D. Cal.2012Background
- Plaintiff Nick Makreas challenges foreclosure on 285 Sylvan Way, Emerald Hills, CA 94062.
- Plaintiff brings four claims against TD: wrongful foreclosure, FDCPA, quiet title, and California Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 claim.
- TD moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6); hearing vacated; motion granted in part and denied in part.
- Court applies Rule 8 and Twombly/Iqbal standard for plausibility in reviewing the complaint.
- Court finds backdating of assignment/substitution may render foreclosure void and thus sustains some claims while dismissing others or granting leave to amend.
- Court orders Plaintiff to amend the FDCPA claim within twenty days or face dismissal with prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| wrongful foreclosure viability based on backdated assignment | Makreas alleges backdated assignment covered up lack of authority | TD argues no proper basis to challenge sale; lacks standing | Claim survives dismissal; backdating can render sale void and allow enjoinment or set aside sale |
| FDCPA claim viability tied to debt collection | TD engaged in debt collection beyond foreclosure actions | Foreclosure itself not debt collection; no FDCPA claim | FDCPA claim dismissed as to TD; leave to amend if facts show separate debt collection actions |
| Quiet title claim viability without tender | Sale void; tender not required | Trustee not indispensable; requirements vary | Quiet title claim survives; tender not required at this stage |
| 17200 claim viability given backdating allegation | Backdated substitution may constitute unlawful or fraudulent practice | No clear unlawful act shown | 17200 claim denied only to extent unsupported; sufficient basis based on backdating to proceed |
Key Cases Cited
- Dimock v. Emerald Properties LLC, 81 Cal.App.4th 868 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) (sale void, not merely voidable; tender not required when void)
- Washington Mutual Bank v. Blechman, 157 Cal.App.4th 662 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (trustee indispensable in quiet-title actions)
- Mangini v. Aerojet-General Corp., 230 Cal.App.3d 1125 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) (relevance of statutory amendments to 17200 relief; past activity can be enjoined)
- Lippitt v. Raymond James Fin. Servs., 340 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2003) (unlawful/unfair/fraudulent prongs of UCL)
- In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal.4th 298 (Cal. 2009) (fraud prong does not require pleading all fraud elements; likelihood of deception)