From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scarff v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jan 12, 2007
C 03-3394 JF (PVT) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2007)

Opinion


EDWARD L. SCARFF, et al., Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al., Defendants. AND RELATED CLAIMS No. C 03-3394 JF (PVT) Re: docket no. 384 United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division. January 12, 2007

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT DETERMINATION

This disposition is not designated for publication and may not be cited.

JEREMY FOGEL, District Judge.

Defendant and counter-claimant Wells Fargo Bank ("Wells Fargo") and defendant Carol Barber ("Barber") move for good faith settlement determination under Cal. Civ. Code § 877.6. The motion is unopposed. The Court heard oral argument on January 12, 2006, and will now grant the motion.

On February 23, 2006, the Court issued an order which reduced the active claims in the First Amended and Consolidated Complaint ("FACC") to the following:

A. Ninth claim for relief: fraud and deceit-secondary liability only and limited to losses from the alleged "credit line scheme"

Plaintiff: Edward Scarff

Defendants: Wells Fargo, Comerica Bank ("Comerica"), Barber, and Joan Burtzel ("Burtzel")

B. Eleventh claim for relief: negligence in connection with the alleged "credit line scheme" Plaintiff: Edward Scarff

Defendants: Comerica Bank ("Comerica") and Burtzel

C. Twelfth claim for relief: liability pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 503 and 18 U.S.C. § 215 in connection with the alleged "credit line scheme"

Plaintiff: Edward Scarff

Defendants: Barber and Burtzel

D. Fifteenth claim for relief: declaratory relief-not injunction, restitution, or attorney's fees Plaintiffs: Edward and Nancy Scarff

Defendants: Wells Fargo and Comerica

See February 23, 2006 Order 33-34.

On June 22, 2005, Wells Fargo filed a counterclaim seeking a judgment against Edward Scarff; Scarff, Sears & Associates ("SSA"); and Pentoga Partners ("Pentoga"). The counterclaim asserts four claims for relief, including a claim for $1,000,000 based on Mr. Scarff's execution of loan documents over a ten year period which established a $1,000,000 line of credit.

On May 9, 2006, Plaintiffs Edward Scarff; Nancy Scarff; SSA; and Pentoga agreed to execute a release in favor of Wells Fargo and Barber in return for Wells Fargo and Barber releasing them from any liability on the $1,000,000 line of credit. This settlement requires the dismissal of the FACC and the Bank's counterclaim, with prejudice, as to the settling parties. Wells Fargo states that the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California approved the settlement on October 27, 2006. Demko Declaration ¶ 16.

The Court has reviewed the settlement agreement and the supporting documents and concludes that the settlement is in good faith as required by Cal. Code Civ. Pro. § 877.6. Accordingly, the Court will grant the motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Scarff v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
Jan 12, 2007
C 03-3394 JF (PVT) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2007)
Case details for

Scarff v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD L. SCARFF, et al., Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division

Date published: Jan 12, 2007

Citations

C 03-3394 JF (PVT) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2007)