Specifically, Countrywide Financial debated new Bank’s area 25504 allege was the same cause for step as the Section 15 allege beneath the number one rights’ concept. Centered on Countrywide Economic, the lending company sought to hang it liable about Borrowing Suisse action because a running person for alleged misrepresentations in the [residential mortgage-backed bonds] providing files plus in this new declaratory relief action, the lending company seeks to hold [Countrywide Monetary] accountable while the a control people for similar alleged misrepresentations throughout the exact same ? providing files. Nationwide Economic conceded the newest court ideas in the two cases were additional, however, argued the lending company alleged an admission of the same no. 1 proper-new asserted right to offering data files free of matter misrepresentations; and you will, more over, claims in both methods to possess sustained the same spoil while the due to [Countrywide’s Financial’s] alleged misconduct.
Countrywide Monetary demurred toward operative amended declaratory recovery complaint, competing res judicata prohibited the fresh Bank’s area 25504 claim given that Bank was impermissibly looking to relitigate a factor in action which was dismissed which have prejudice in the an earlier step between your same activities
Additionally, the financial institution argued there’s zero final view for the merits on the Borrowing from the bank Suisse step due to the fact their claims on every securitization under consideration from inside the Borrowing Suisse was basically element of one reason behind step for purposes of res judicata. Since Lender said, the vast majority of Bank’s states to the those individuals bonds in the Borrowing Suisse step continue to be pending. Therefore, there were zero finally judgment on merits of Bank’s whole factor in action to the some of the five bonds regarding Borrowing Suisse step which can be as well as the subject off this action[.] 5
When you look at the opposition, the financial institution contended new part 25504 allege it asserted regarding the declaratory relief step try different from brand new claims you to [it] voluntarily overlooked inside the Borrowing from the bank Suisse and this res judicata don’t club they out of saying more says around a separate statute
The newest judge noticed, [t]the guy real matter here’s whether or not what was ignored is the same number one correct as to what is said right here [on declaratory save action]. Then your judge answered practical question on the affirmative. They explained, the latest Securities Operate and you can areas 25401 and you may 25501 bring manage individuals responsible under the same items ? with no significant difference under the government program or even the condition scheme? While the California law isnt materially not the same as the fresh new government law. The latest legal proceeded, a broad layout during the preclusive impact jurisprudence is the fact that [c]ourt isnt limited by the brand new style, or even the pleadings, or the articulation about reasons for step. Put simply ? you don’t take a look at reasons for action ? or elements of bring about[s] away from action. You’re able to the center of what is happening. And it generally seems to me that heart of what actually is taking place, from this perspective ? was handle individual liability. One to around a federal statute and something below a state statute. With no matter how you ask they or what the succession try, ? that it’s the same in both cases.
We comment de- novo the new court’s buy retaining Countrywide’s demurrer as opposed to get-off to amend. (Property of Dito (2011) 198 Cal.Application.fourth 791, 800 (Dito ).) I first feedback the newest problem de novo to determine when it consists of affairs enough to state a factor in step significantly less than any legal theory. [Citation.] I eradicate the new demurrer since admitting most of the matter activities properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions otherwise conclusions of-fact otherwise laws. [Violation.] We also consider things which are judicially seen.’ [Ticket.] ‘ [Violation.] I affirm if any floor available in service of your own demurrer try well-taken however, discover mistake if https://paydayloanalabama.com/talladega/ the plaintiff states a cause of action lower than any possible judge concept. [Citations.] We are not bound by brand new trial court’s said factors, or no, supporting its ruling; i comment the brand new ruling, maybe not the rationale. [Ticket.]’ [Pass.] (Id. at the p. 800.)