Karunaratne v. U.S. Bank, 041318 FED9, 16-56803

Docket Nº:16-56803
Party Name:KANCHANA KARUNARATNE, an individual and CARLA KARUNARATNE, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. U.S. BANK, as trustee, successor in interest to Wachovia Bank, National Association as trustee for Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Trust, Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-A6 (erroneously sued as U.S. Bank, National ...
Judge Panel:Before: SCHROEDER and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and DRAIN, District Judge.
Case Date:April 13, 2018
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

KANCHANA KARUNARATNE, an individual and CARLA KARUNARATNE, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

U.S. BANK, as trustee, successor in interest to Wachovia Bank, National Association as trustee for Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Trust, Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-A6 (erroneously sued as U.S. Bank, National Association); OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; WESTERN PROGRESSIVE, LLC; DOES, 1-10, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-56803

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

April 13, 2018

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted April 10, 2018 [**] Pasadena, California

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 3:16-cv-00843-JLS-KSC

Before: SCHROEDER and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges, and DRAIN, [***] District Judge.

MEMORANDUM [*]

Plaintiffs-Appellants Kanchana Karunaratne and Carla Karunaratne brought suit against Defendants-Appellees alleging wrongful foreclosure and violations of California Civil Code sections 2924(a)(6) and 2924.17; California Business and Professions Code sections 17200 et seq. and 17500 et seq.; and the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiffs-Appellants are borrowers and trustors on a deed of trust for residential property in Escondido, California. The gist of their claims is that because the transfer of the deed of trust to a securitized trust in New York was invalid, none of Defendants-Appellees has a beneficial interest allowing them to foreclose. The district court dismissed the complaint, holding that Plaintiffs-Appellants lacked standing to challenge the assignment of the deed of trust.

Our review is de novo, see Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir. 2005), and we may affirm on any ground supported by the record, see Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

California law permits a wrongful foreclosure plaintiff to challenge an assignment of the beneficial interest to the foreclosing entity only if that assignment was void ab initio rather than merely voidable. See...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP