From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Natan v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 23, 2016
Case No.: CV 14-5779 DSF (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2016)

Summary

rejecting application of American Pipe because putative multidistrict litigation did not include HAMP fraud or misrepresentation claims

Summary of this case from Brexendorf v. Bank of Am., N.A.

Opinion

Case No.: CV 14-5779 DSF (PLAx)

09-23-2016

REX NATAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendant.


JUDGMENT

The Court having granted defendant's motion for summary judgment, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiffs take nothing, that the action be dismissed with prejudice, and that defendant recover its costs of suit pursuant to a bill of costs filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1920. Dated: 9/23/16

/s/_________

Dale S. Fischer

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Natan v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 23, 2016
Case No.: CV 14-5779 DSF (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2016)

rejecting application of American Pipe because putative multidistrict litigation did not include HAMP fraud or misrepresentation claims

Summary of this case from Brexendorf v. Bank of Am., N.A.
Case details for

Natan v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:REX NATAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 23, 2016

Citations

Case No.: CV 14-5779 DSF (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2016)

Citing Cases

Brexendorf v. Bank of Am., N.A.

(Doc. 45, p. 6.) But Brexendorf misreads American Pipe . Tolling is appropriate where the separate suit filed…