Sencion v. Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc.
4:10-cv-03108
N.D. Cal.Jan 28, 2011Background
- Foreclosure action by Sencion against Saxon, Ocwen, and DOES 1–100; FAC asserts breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, UCL, declaratory relief, and quiet title.
- Saxon moves to strike punitive/exemplary damages and attorney’s fees prayers under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f).
- Sencion did not oppose the motion; deadline for opposition expired.
- The court previously granted Saxon’s motion to dismiss the breach of fiduciary duty claim, affecting the basis for punitive damages.
- Under the American rule, attorney’s fees generally are borne by the losing party unless a statutory/contractual basis exists; court finds no basis in FAC.
- Judge Paul S. Grewal issued the order denying-in-part and granting-in-part Saxon’s motion to strike, as moot for punitive damages and granted for attorney’s fees where no basis was shown.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether punitive damages prayer should be stricken. | Sencion seeks punitive damages based on breach of fiduciary duty. | Saxon contends no viable basis due to dismissal of fiduciary duty claim. | Denied as moot; punitive damages not at issue after dismissal. |
| Whether attorney’s fees prayer should be stricken. | Sencion seeks fees under statutory/contractual basis. | No basis shown in FAC. | Granted; fees prayer struck. |
| Standards for granting a Rule 12(f) motion to strike. | Not applicable (no opposition). | Rule 12(f) disfavored and strikings require clear irrelevance. | Rule 12(f) motion denied as moot for punitive damages; granted for fees. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rosales v. Citibank, Fed. Sav. Bank, 133 F. Supp. 2d 1177 (N.D. Cal. 2001) (striking pleadings and scope of 12(f) relief; standards for motions to strike)
- Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty, 984 F.2d 1524 (9th Cir. 1993) (importance of avoiding litigation costs in 12(f) rulings; later reversed on other grounds)
- LeDuc v. Kentucky Cent. Life Ins. Co., 814 F. Supp. 820 (N.D. Cal. 1992) (grounds for granting 12(f) motions; pleading standards)
- California v. United States, 512 F. Supp. 36 (N.D. Cal. 1981) (treat pleading in light most favorable to pleader; admissible presumptions)
- Burnaby v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 40 Cal. App. 4th 787 (1995) (California law on attorney’s fees under American rule)