In Re Javaheri v. JPMORGAN CHASE First Case _ ANSWER to Second Amended Complaint Filed by Defendant...

"If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich." John F. Kennedy, January 20, 1961

Query Reports Utilities Logout

(FFMx), DISCOVERY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA (Western Division - Los Angeles) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:10-cv-08185-ODW -FFM

Daryoush Javaheri v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. et al Assigned to: Judge Otis D Wright, II Referred to: Magistrate Judge Frederick F. Mumm Demand: $5,000,000 Related Case: 2:11-cv-10072-ODW-FFMCause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 10/29/2010 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 220 Real Property: Foreclosure Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff

Daryoush Javaheri represented by Douglas Crawford Gillies Douglas Gillies 3756 Torino Drive Santa Barbara, CA 93105 805-682-7033 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.

Defendant

JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. represented by Frances Q Jett AlvaradoSmith APC 633 West 5th Street Suite 1100

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/iquery.pl

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DisplayMenu.pl?Reports

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DisplayMenu.pl?Utilities

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/login.pl?logout

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?518754

Administrator

Rectangle

Administrator

Sticky Note

Additional case filed 12.5.2011

Los Angeles, CA 90071 213-229-2400 Fax: 213-229-2499 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Theodore E Bacon AlvaradoSmith APC 633 West Fifth Street Suite 1100 Los Angeles, CA 90071 213-229-2400 Fax: 213-229-2499 Email: [email protected] ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

California Reconveyance Co. TERMINATED: 01/29/2011

represented by Frances Q Jett (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Theodore E Bacon (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant

DOES 1-150, inclusive

Date Filed # Docket Text

10/29/2010 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants California Reconveyance Co., DOES, JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. Case assigned to Judge Otis D Wright, II for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Frederick F. Mumm.(Filing fee $ 350 PAID) Jury Demanded, filed by plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri.(car) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/3/2010: # 1 Ntc of Asgmt, # 2 Summons, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet) (mg). (Entered: 10/29/2010)

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_doc.pl?caseid=486153&de_seq_num=8&dm_id=10598334&doc_num=1&pdf_header=2

https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/doc1/031111172567



10/29/2010 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants California Reconveyance Co., DOES 1-150, inclusive, JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. (car) (Entered: 10/29/2010)

10/29/2010 2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri, identifying Other Affiliate Bank of America, Other Affiliate Washington Mutual Bank for Daryoush Javaheri. (car) (mg). (Entered: 10/29/2010)

10/29/2010 3 PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction - Immediate Relief Sought, filed by plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. Lodged Proposed Order.(car) (Additional attachment(s) added on 11/2/2010: # 1 Proposed Order) (mg). (Entered: 10/29/2010)

10/29/2010 4 PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES In Support of Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause Re: Preliminary Injunction 3 to Prevent Foreclosure, filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (car) (mg). (Entered: 10/29/2010)

10/29/2010 5 CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH EFFORT of Douglas Gillies In Support of EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order to Show Cause re: Preliminary Injunction 3 filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (car) (mg). (Entered: 10/29/2010)

10/29/2010 6 ORDER by Judge Otis D Wright, II: denying 3 defendants Ex Parte Application for temporary restraining order. (lc) (Entered: 11/02/2010)

11/03/2010 7 STANDING ORDER by Judge Otis D Wright, II, (sce) (Entered: 11/03/2010)

11/03/2010 8 NOTICE of Lis Pendens filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 11/03/2010)

11/22/2010 9 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case {as to Plaintiff's Complaint} filed by defendants California Reconveyance Co., JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. Motion set for hearing on 12/27/2010 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D Wright II. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Jett, Frances) (Entered: 11/22/2010)

11/22/2010 10 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE filed by defendants California Reconveyance Co., JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1 and 2)(Jett, Frances) (Entered:

















11/22/2010)

11/23/2010 11 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents. The following error(s) was found: Local Rule 7.1-1 No Certification of Interested Parties. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc) (Entered: 11/23/2010)

12/07/2010 12 Joint STIPULATION to Continue Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss from 12/27/2010 to 1/10/2011 filed by Defendant California Reconveyance Co., JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order re Stipulation to Continue Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss)(Bacon, Theodore) (Entered: 12/07/2010)

12/13/2010 13 ORDER Re Stipulation to Continue Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 12 by Judge Otis D Wright II. It is hereby ordered that the hearing on Defendants Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint 9 is continued from December 27, 2010 to January 10, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. Opposition and reply papers will be due in the above court per local rule 7-9. (sch) (Entered: 12/14/2010)

12/18/2010 14 MEMORANDUM in Opposition filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 12/18/2010)

12/19/2010 15 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE Exhibit 4 filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 12/19/2010)



12/23/2010 18 REPLY in support of Motion to Dismiss Complaint (cont'd for hrg to 01/10/2011} filed by Defendants California Reconveyance Co., JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Jett, Frances) (Entered: 12/23/2010)

01/03/2011 22 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants Daryoush Javaheri amending Complaint - (Discovery) 1 Jury demand,filed by plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri (lc) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/2/2011: # 1 exhibits) (lc). (Entered: 02/01/2011)















01/06/2011 19 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: The hearing on the above-referenced motion, scheduled for January 10, 2011 at 1:30 p.m., is hereby VACATED. The matter stands submitted. An order will issue. (rne) (Entered: 01/06/2011)

01/11/2011 20 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D Wright, II: Court grants Defendants, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and California Reconveyance Companys Motion to dismiss complaint {9].Plaintiff shall have twenty (20) days from the date of this Order to amend his Complaint. If Plaintiff fails to do so, all claims will be dismissed with prejudice. (lc) (Entered: 01/12/2011)

01/29/2011 21 REQUEST to Dismiss defendant California Reconveyance Co. filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 01/29/2011)

02/17/2011 23 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case {Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint} filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. Motion set for hearing on 3/21/2011 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D Wright II. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Jett, Frances) (Entered: 02/17/2011)

02/17/2011 24 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE (in support of Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint) filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Jett, Frances) (Entered: 02/17/2011)

02/28/2011 25 MEMORANDUM in Opposition filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 02/28/2011)

03/07/2011 26 REPLY in Support of JPMorgan's Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint filed by Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Jett, Frances) (Entered: 03/07/2011)

03/15/2011 27 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: Vacating Hearing on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint 23 (Filed 2/17/11). The hearing on the above-referenced motion, scheduled for March 21, 2011 at 1:30 p.m., is hereby VACATED. The matter stands submitted. An order will issue. (rne) (Entered: 03/15/2011)

03/24/2011 28 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D Wright, II: granting 23 Defendant, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Motion to Dismiss plaintiffs first amended complaint. Plaintiff shall have twenty (20) days from the date of this Order in which to













amend his Complaint, provided that he can, in good faith, allege sufficient facts to support his claims. If Plaintiff fails to do so, all claims against WaMu will be dismissed with prejudice. (lc) (Entered: 03/24/2011)

04/12/2011 29 SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendants DOES 1-50, JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. amending First Amended Complaint 22 ;Jury Demand filed by plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri (lc) (lc). (Entered: 04/13/2011)

04/28/2011 30 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. Motion set for hearing on 6/6/2011 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D Wright II. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Jett, Frances) (Entered: 04/28/2011)

04/28/2011 31 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) 30 filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - C)(Jett, Frances) (Entered: 04/28/2011)

05/16/2011 32 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) 30 filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 05/16/2011)

05/16/2011 33 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) 30 filed by Plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri. (Gillies, Douglas) (Entered: 05/16/2011)

05/23/2011 34 REPLY in support MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) MOTION to Dismiss Case (Second Amended Complaint) 30 filed by Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Jett, Frances) (Entered: 05/23/2011)

05/31/2011 35 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER Vacating Motion to Dismiss Case 30 by Judge Otis D Wright II. The hearing on the above-referenced motion, scheduled for June 6, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. is hereby VACATED. The matter stands submitted. An order will issue. (sch) (Entered: 05/31/2011)

06/02/2011 36 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER Granting in part and Denying in part Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint 30 (Filed 4/28/11} by Judge Otis D Wright II. For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED in Part and DENIED in Part. (See


















Order for Details). (sch) (Entered: 06/02/2011)

06/28/2011 37 ANSWER to Amended Complaint 29 SECOND filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A..(Jett, Frances) (Entered: 06/28/2011)

06/29/2011 38 ORDER setting Scheduling Conference set for 9/12/2011 at 01:30 PM; compliance with FRCP 26(f) and filing of report and other instructions. Counsel for plaintiff shall immediately serve this Order on all parties, including any new parties to the action by Judge Otis D Wright II. (sch) (Entered: 06/29/2011)

06/29/2011 39 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Answer to Complaint 37 . The following error(s) was found: Local Rule 7.1-1 No Certification of Interested Parties. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (sch) (Entered: 06/29/2011)

07/14/2011 40 Certification and Notice of Interested Parties filed by defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A., identifying JPMorgan and California Reconveyance Co.. (Bacon, Theodore) (Entered: 07/14/2011)

08/29/2011 41 JOINT REPORT of [FRCP 26(f)] filed by Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A.. (Bacon, Theodore) (Entered: 08/29/2011)

08/30/2011 42 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Report 41 . The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. The correct event is: Joint Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc) (Entered: 08/30/2011)

08/30/2011 43 MINUTE OF (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER Vacating Scheduling Conference by Judge Otis D Wright II. The Court is in receipt of the parties' Joint Rule 26(f) Report. The Court has reviewed the report and deems a scheduling conference unnecessary. Accordingly, the scheduling conference presently set for September 12, 2011 at 1:30 p.m., is hereby VACATED, and










Administrator

Rectangle

Administrator

Highlight

no appearances are necessary. A Scheduling and Case Management Order will issue. (sch) (Entered: 08/30/2011)

08/30/2011 44 ORDER by Judge Otis D Wright, II: Granted the NOTICE AND REQUEST of Settlement Procedure Selection (Sp2). For Settlement Procedure No. 2, counsel are responsible for contacting the settlement officer at the appropriate time to arrange for further proceedings. Upon obtaining the settlement officer's consent to serve, counsel shall file Form ADR-02 (Stipulation Regarding Selection of Attorney Settlement Officer) with the court. (lom) (Entered: 08/31/2011)

08/30/2011 45 SCHEDULING AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER by Judge Otis D Wright, II, The Court has implemented the parties' suggested dates with only minor adjustments. If counsel fail to file the required Pre-Trial documents or fail to appear at the Pre-Trial conference and such failure is not otherwise satisfactorily explained to the Court: (a) the cause shall stand dismissed for failure to prosecute. Jury Trial set for 9/18/2012 09:00 a.m.; File Final pretrial exhibit stipulation by 09/13/2012; Hearings on Motions in Limine on 09/10/2012 at 3:00 p.m.;Final Pretrial Conference set for 8/27/2012 03:00 p.m. Last day to conduct Settlement Conference 07/23/2012; Last day for hearing Motions 07/30/2012; Discovery cut-off 6/18/2012; Last day to amend pleadings or add parties due by 12/5/2011. (See document for details) (ys) (Entered: 08/31/2011)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

12/30/2011 05:51:16 PACER Login: cc8982 Client

Code:

Description: Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:10-cv-08185-ODW -FFM End date: 12/30/2011

Billable Pages: 5 Cost: 0.40



Case 2:10-cv-08185-ODW -FFM Document 37 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:938

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

i" 14

" ~ 15 0 0 < ~

< 16 > ~

" 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

THEODORE E. BACON (CA Bar No. 115395) tbacon@,AlvaradoSmith.com FRANCES Q. JETT (CA BarNo. 175612) fjett@,AlvaraaoSmith.com DA VlD J. MASUT ANI (CA Bar No. 172305) [email protected] AL VARADOSMITH A Profes~~onal Corporation 633 W. 5 J Street, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, California 90071 Tel: (213) 229-2400 Fax: (213) 229-2499

Attorneys for Defendant JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. ,

UNITED STATES DISTRlCT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRlCT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

DARYOUSHJAVAHERl,

Plaintiff,

v.

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY and DOES 1-150, inclusive,

Defendant.

CASE NO.: CV-1O-8185 ODW (FFMx)

JUDGE: Hon. Otis D. Wright II

ANSWER BY DEFENDANT JPMORGAN BANK, N.A, TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

Trial Date: Action Filed:

None Set October 29,2010

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., ("JPMorgan") answers the Second

Amended Complaint ("SAC") of plaintiff Daryoush Javaheri ("Plaintiff') as follows:

lntrodllction

1. In response to paragraph 1 of the SAC, as to the allegations concerning

Washington Mutual Bank, FA, JPMorgan lacks sufficient information to fOlm a belief

as to the truth of the allegations and therefore denies. As to all other allegations,

JPMorgan denies the allegations contained therein.

2. In response to paragraph 2 of the SAC, JPMorgan lacks knowledge and

1 2091987. 1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

" 14

r

" ~ 15 0 0 < " < 16 > ;;'

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

information sufficient to fOlm a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in

said paragraph and therefore denies each and every allegation therein.


information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in


Parties and Jurisdiction

4. In response to paragraph 4 of the SAC, based upon information and

belief, JPMorgan admits the allegations set forth therein.

5. In response to paragraph 5 of the SAC, JPMorgan states that it is a

national banking association authori zed to do business in the State of Califomia.

JPMorgan denies that it is a corporation. As to the remaining allegations, JPMorgan

admits it is the current servicer and owner of the Subject Loan.

6. In response to paragraph 6 of the SAC, JPMorgan denies that the loan has

been securitized. Except as expressly alleged, JPMorgan lacks knowledge and

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations contained in


7. In response to paragraph 7 of the SAC, the allegations in this paragraph

contain legal conclusions as to which no answer is necessary.

Jury Trial Demand


contain legal conclusions as to which no answer is necessary. To the extent that the

paragraph contains allegations of fact directed against JPMorgan, JPMorgan lacks

knowledge and infomlation sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

contained in said paragraph and therefore deny each and every allegation therein.

Claims for Relief

9. In response to paragraph 9 of the SAC, JPMorgan denies the allegations

contained therein.

III

2 2091987.1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

" 14 ,

i ~ 15 0 0

"" • "" 16 > ~

" 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Background Facts

10. In response to paragraph JO of the SAC, JPMorgan, based upon

information and belief, admits the allegations therein.


information sufficient to form a beliefas to the truth ofthe allegations contained in


12. In response to paragraph 12 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that Plaintiff

executed a Fixed I Adjustable Rate Note ("Subject Note") in the amount of

$2,660,000.00 payable to Washington Mutual Bank, FA. JPMorgan further admits

Plaintiff executed the DOT. As to the remaining allegations, Defendant lacks

knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth ofthe allegations

contained in said paragraph and therefore denies each and every remaining allegation

therein.

13. In response to paragraph 13 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits the allegations

contained therein.


therein.

15. In response to paragraph 15 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that it is the

owner and servicer of the Loan.


contained therein.

17. In response to paragraph 17 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that on August

16, 2010, California Reconveyance Company ("CRC") caused to be recorded a Notice

of Sale ("NOS") which set the date of the trustees' sale of the Subject Property as

September 7, 20 I 0, and that the document is the best evidence of its contents and

speaks for itself.

III

III

3 2091987.1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

" 14

>-:; M 15 0 0 < " < 16 > • "

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Violation of Civil Code Section 2923.5

18. In response to paragraph 18 of the SAC, JPMorgan re-alleges and

incorporates by reference paragraphs I through 17 as if set forth herein.


contained therein.

20. In response to paragraph 20 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that it

received the subject letter, but denies that it was not working to assist the Plaintiff.




therein.



24. In response to paragraph 24 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that it sent

Exhibit 7 to the Complaint, but denies the remaining allegations.

25. In response to paragraph 25 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits on or about

May 14,2010, CRC caused a Notice of Default concerning the Subject Property to be

recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office. Defendant admits the

remaining allegations contained in paragraph 25.


contained therein.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Wrongful Foreclosure


incorporates by reference paragraphs I through 26 as if set forth herein.

28. In response to paragraph 28 ofthe SAC, JPMorgan denies the allegations

therein.

4 209 1987. 1


1

2

0 .)

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

~ 14

~

i ~ 15 0 0 < ~

< 16 > " ""

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29. In response to paragraph 29 of the SAC, JPMorgan alleges no recorded

transfer was necessary as it acquired the Loan from the FDIC pursuant to a Purchase

and Assumption Agreement dated September 25, 2008 .

30. In response to paragraph 30 of the SAC, JPMorgan denies the

allegations therein.


therein.

32. In response to paragraph 32 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that the

Subject Note speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents.

33. In response to paragraph 33 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that the DOT

speaks for itself and is the best evidence of its contents.


therein.

35. In response to paragraph 35 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that paragraph

24 of the DOT speaks for itself. As to the remaining allegations, JPMorgan denies

each and every allegation therein.

36. In response to paragraph 36 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that on about

May 3, 2010 CRC caused to be recorded a substitution of trustee. Defendant denies

Deborah Brignac's signature is a forgery.

37. In response to paragraph 37 of the SAC, JPMorgan denies the subject

signature is a forgery.

38. In response to paragraph 38 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that on or

about May 14,2010, CRC caused to be recorded a Notice of Default ("NOD")

regarding the Subject Propeliy which was signed by Silvia Freeberg. As to the

remaining allegations, JPMorgan admits it is described as beneficiary in the

Declaration of Compliance. JPMorgan admits that Washington Mutual is described in

the NOD as the original beneficiary. JPMorgan denies the loan was sold in 2006.


5 209 1987.1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

" 14 ..

;; ~ 15 0 0 < " < 16 > • "

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

contained therein.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Quasi Contract

40. In response to paragraph 40 of the SAC, IPMorgan re-alleges and

incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 39 as if set fOlth herein.


contained therein.


contained therein.

43. In response to paragraph 43 of the SAC, JPMorgan admits that paragraph

23 of the DOT speaks for itself. As to the remaining allegations, JPMorgan denies the

allegations therein.



paragraph contains allegations of fact directed against JPMorgan, IPMorgan denies


FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

No Contract

45. In response to paragraph 45 of the SAC, as this claim has been dismissed

with prejudice, no response to this paragraph is required.









6 209 1987.1


2

0 ~

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

\3

" 14

~

i V> 15 0 Q

< ~

< 16 > " "

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28



















FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Quiet Title


incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 44 as if set forth herein.



paragraph contains allegations of fact directed against JPMorgan, JPMorgan lacks

knowledge and infonnation sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations

contained in said paragraph and therefore deny each and every allegation therein.

61. In response to paragraph 61 of the SAC, based upon information and

7 209 1987. 1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

" 14

" " ~ 15 0 0 < • < 16 > ~

..:

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

belief, JPMorgan admits the allegations therein.


contained therein.


contained therein.


contained therein.



paragraph contains allegations of fact directed against JPMorgan, JPMorgan denies


SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Declaratory and Injunctive Relief


incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 44, and 69 through 65 as if set forth

herein.


contained therein.






contained therein.





8 209 1987 1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

E 14

, '" 15 0 0 < • < 16 > " -<

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28



paragraph contains allegations of fact directed against lPMorgan, JPMorgan denies

each and every allegation therein, that it acted improperly or that it caused any

damage to Plaintiff.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress







75 . In response to paragraph 75 of the SAC, as this claim has been dismissed








As separate and distinct affirmative defenses to the SAC on file in this action,

JPMorgan alleges as follows:

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to State a Claim for Relief)

I . The SAC, and each claim asserted in the SAC, fails to set fOlth facts

sufficient to constitute a claim for relief against JPMorgan.

III

9 2091987.1


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

, 14 ~

i ~ 15 0 0 < • < 16 > " <:

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Waiver)

2. Plaintiff is balTed by the equitable doctrine of waiver from obtaining any

relief as against JPMorgan.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Estoppel)

3. Plaintiff is estopped from asserting and/or recovering on any claims

against JPMorgan by reason of Plaintiff's own acts, omissions, and conduct.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Unclean Hands)

4. Plaintiff is balTed by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands from

asserting any claim against JPMorgan.

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Privilege)

5. The SAC, and each claim asserted in the SAC, is baiTed by virtue ofthe

fact that all of the acts alleged to have been performed by JPMorgan were privileged

or justified, if performed at all.

SIXTH AFFIRM A TIVE DEFENSE

(Unjust Enrichment)

6. The SAC, and each claim asselied in the SAC, is balTed by virtue of the

fact that Plaintiff would be unjustly enriched to the detriment of JPMorgan.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Offset)

7. The SAC, and each claim asselied in the SAC, is balTed, in whole or part,

by virtue of offsets to which JPMorgan is entitled by way of Plaintiff's wrongful

conduct.

III

III

2091987. 1 10


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

~ 14

>-i ~ 15 0 0 < • < 16 > " -<

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Ratification)

8. The SAC, and each claim asserted in the SAC, is ban'ed by Plaintiff's

ratification of the actions allegedly undertaken.

NINTH AFFIRMA TlVE DEFENSE

(Consent)

9. The SAC, and each claim asserted in the SAC, is barred by Plaintiff's

consent.

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Comparative Fault)

10. Plaintiff's recovery, if any, must be reduced proportionately to the extent

that any damages alleged by Plaintiff are caused and contributed to by Plaintiff's own

action or actions by third parties.

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to Mitigate)

11. Plaintiff is barred from recovering monetary damages from JPMorgan or

any other relief against JPMorgan to the extent Plaintiff failed to mitigate or

reasonably attempt to mitigate the damages as required by law.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Right to Add Additional Affirmative Defenses)

12. JPMorgan allege that they cannot fully anticipate all affirmative defenses

that may be applicable to the within action. Accordingly, the right to assert additional

affirmative defenses, if and to the extent that such affirmative defenses are applicable,

is hereby reserved.

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Equitable Lien)

13. Defendant alleges that it is entitled to an equitable lien in the amount that

its loan paid off existing loans secured by the subject property.

11 2091987.1


2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1 1

12

13

= 14 " 5.i ~ 15 0 0 < " < 16 , ~

'" 17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Good Faith Encumbrancer)

14. Defendant alleges that its security interests in the subject property should

stand, as Defendant is a good-faith encumbrancer for value which took its interests

without actual or record notice of any adverse claims.

WHEREFORE, IPMorgan prays:

1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by his SAC;

2. For dismissal of the SAC against JPMorgan with prejudice;

3. For attorneys' fees as permitted by law or contract and costs of suit; and

4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

DATED: June 28, 2011

Respectfully submitted,

ALVARADOSMITH A Professional Corporation

209 1987. 1

By: /s/ Frances Q. Jett THEODORE E. BACON FRANCES Q. JEIT DAVID J. MASUTANI Attorneys for Defendant JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

12

In Re Javaheri v. JPMORGAN CHASE First Case _ ANSWER to Second Amended Complaint Filed by Defendant...

Documents

Transcript of In Re Javaheri v. JPMORGAN CHASE First Case _ ANSWER to Second Amended Complaint Filed by Defendant...