In Re Javaheri v. JPMORGAN CHASE First Case - ANSWER To Second Amended Complaint Filed by Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A

"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-FFM
Cause: 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:
douglasgillies@gmail.com
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
Los Angeles, CA 90071
213-229-2400
Fax: 213-229-2499
Email:
fjett@alvaradosmith.com

Theodore E Bacon
AlvaradoSmith APC
633 West Fifth Street Suite
1100
Los Angeles, CA 90071
213-229-2400
Fax: 213-229-2499
Email:
tbacon@AlvaradoSmith.com

Defendant
California Reconveyance Co.
TERMINATED: 01/29/2011
represented by Frances Q Jett
(See above for address)

Theodore E Bacon
(See above for address)

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)
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) 30 filed by Plaintiff
05/16/2011 33 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE re MOTION to Dismiss
Case (Second Amended Complaint) 30 filed by Plaintiff
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)
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)
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
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)
dmasutani@AlvaradoSmlth.com
AL VARADOSMITH
A 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.
21. In response to paragraph 21 of the SAC, the allegations in thi s paragraph
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
2091987. 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.
47. In response to paragraph 47 of the SAC, as thi s claim has been dismissed
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
with prej udice, no response to this paragraph is required.
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
2091987. 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
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
Case 2:10-cv-08185-ODW -FFM Document 37 Filed 06/28/11 Page 10 of 12 Page ID
#:947
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
#:948
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
#:949
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 JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Re Javaheri v. JPMORGAN CHASE First Case - ANSWER To Second Amended Complaint Filed by Defendant JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

"If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who

You might also like