Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

5 Citing cases

  1. Morgensen v. Downey Sav. & Loan Ass'n, FA

    Case No. 5:15-cv-02000-HRL (N.D. Cal. Jan. 20, 2016)   Cited 2 times

    Jenkins v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 216 Cal. App.4th 497, 515 (2013) ("As an unrelated third party to the alleged securitization, and any other subsequent transfers of the beneficial interest under the promissory note, [plaintiff] lacks standing to enforce any agreements, including the investment trust's pooling and servicing agreement, relating to such transactions."); Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. C12-05969 SI, 2013 WL 132519 at *3 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 9, 2013) (collecting cases).

  2. Simmons v. Aurora Bank FSB

    Case No. 5:13-cv-00482-HRL (N.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2016)   Cited 8 times
    Stating that, to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure, a plaintiff must allege that "she was prejudiced or harmed"

    Further, plaintiff failed to allege facts establishing her standing to pursue a claim for breach of the PSA to which she was neither a party nor a third-party beneficiary. Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. C12-05969 SI, 2013 WL 132519 at *3 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 9, 2013) (collecting cases).

  3. Reyes-Aguilar v. Bank of Am., N.A.

    Case No. 13-cv-05764-JCS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 20, 2014)   Cited 8 times
    Dismissing a slander of title action because errors in the securitization of a loan did not constitute by itself malice or injury to the Plaintiff

    Because Plaintiffs do not assert a separate cause of action based on Defendants' alleged violation of the Internal Revenue Code, the Court need not address it in deciding the Motions. See Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., C 12-05969 SI, 2013 WL 132519, at *1 n.1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2013) (taking same approach). Nonetheless, the Court notes that this claim is not supported by any plausible factual allegations and would thus fail.

  4. Simmons v. Aurora Bank, FSB

    Case No. 5:13-cv-00482 HRL (N.D. Cal. Sep. 30, 2013)   Cited 17 times

    She does not allege facts establishing her standing to pursue a claim for breach of that agreement, and courts have held that homeowners do not have standing to pursue such claims. Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. C12-05969 SI, 2013 WL 132519 at *3 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 9, 2013) (collecting cases).

  5. Patel v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc.

    Case No.: 4:13-cv-1874 KAW (N.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2013)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding plaintiff's allegations of robo-signing conclusory and insufficient where the plaintiff merely alleged variations in signatures

    With regard to any alleged breach of a PSA, as they acknowledged at the hearing, Plaintiffs cannot meet the first element of a breach of contract claim because they are not parties to the agreements. See Phong Tran v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 12-4507 PSG, 2013 WL 2368048 at *2-3 (N.D. Cal. May 29, 2013) (dismissing Plaintiff's breach of PSA claims without leave to amend because Plaintiff did not allege that he is a party to the PSA, only that he was harmed by Defendants' alleged violation of the PSA); Kirk v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. C 12-05969 SI, 2013 WL 132519 at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2013) (noting that "courts have held that neither the PSA nor [state law] confers standing on the homeowner" and finding that "any duty servicers may have to maximize net present value under their pooling and servicing agreements is owed to all parties in a loan pool, not to any particular parties"). As such, Plaintiffs cannot state a claim for breach of any PSA, and the claims for breach of the PSAs are dismissed with prejudice.