What is rescission?

Useful Rulings on Rescission

Recent Rulings on Rescission

MED CAFE CORP, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS MOSTAFA KARIMBEIK, ET AL.

Third Cause of Action: Rescission of Written Contract A party to a contract may rescind it where the contract is unlawful, was the result of mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence, or will prejudice the public interest if permitted to stand, or if there was a failure of consideration. (Civ. Code, § 1689, subd. (b).) Plaintiff alleges the contract “was procured by fraud,” so it is “entitled to rescind the Lease.” (FAC ¶¶ 23-24.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

NATALIE GAYEVA VS SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING INC, ET AL.

Select and BNYM request the Court to take judicial notice of eight recorded documents including the deed of trust, notices of default, rescission of deed of trust, assignment of deed of trust, and the quitclaim deed. The Court GRANTS these requests. DEMURRER A demurrer should be sustained only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed. (Code Civ. Pro., §§ 430.30, et seq.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

MICHAEL GOLDBERG VS HALLORAN & SAGE LLP, ET AL.

It alleges that Terry and DGS are jointly and severally liable with Woodbridge for rescission of more than $200 million in investor purchases based on their knowing and material assistance of Woodbridge’s securities’ violations. (Complaint, ¶¶ 564-565.) 2.

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

ANTONIO JOSEPH GARCIA VS JEAN SHIOMOTO

[In addition to 'monetary relief' noted in section 1032, the term includes, among other remedies,] specific performance, injunction, or the reformation or rescission of a contract.” (Childers, supra at 1549.) In Childers, the plaintiffs sued for fraud related to the purchase of a residence. The trial court granted a motion for judgment, finding that the defendant made a misrepresentation, but plaintiffs suffered no damages.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

OKSANNA ASIRYAN VS ANGELA A. VETISYAN, ET AL.

The Complaint asserts nine causes of action for (1) Rescission Based on Fraud, (2) Fraud and Deceit, (3) Concealment, (4) Intentional and Negligent Misrepresentation, (5) Breach of Contract, (6) Negligent Nondisclosure, (7) Breach of Duty to Disclose, (8) Constructive Fraud, and (9) Breach of Fiduciary Duty. On March 2, 2020, Defendants filed the instant motion to reclassify this case as a limited action. On April 1, 2020, Plaintiff filed an opposition.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

OSCAR RUIZ VS PERSONNEL STAFFING GROUP, LLC, A FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Defendant Personnel Staffing Group, LLC filed a notice of joinder to Pirate Staffing’s motion on March 18, 2020 Legal Standard “Where the Court has determined that an agreement to arbitrate a controversy exists, the Court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy …unless it determines that… grounds exist for rescission of the agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) Among the grounds which can support rescission are fraud, duress, and unconscionability. (Tiri v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

CARCREDIT VS KLINE

Prior rulings found there is a valid arbitration clause; that there was insufficient evidence to find a waiver or rescission of the arbitration agreement. Those findings are extended to this motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

GOODSELL V. HAVEN HOUSE RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES, INC.

Under TILA, rescission is only available as a remedy in property transactions when the property is “used as the principal dwelling of the person to whom credit is extended.” 15 U.S.C. § 1635(a). “A consumer can only have one principal dwelling at a time. A vacation or other second home would not be a principal dwelling.” See 12 C.F.R. Pt. 226, Supp. I, at 392 (1991). Further, TILA does not apply to loans taken primarily for business purposes. 15 U.S.C.A. § 1603(1).

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

KELSEA SAKAMOTO VS GLENOAKS TOWNHOMES LLC, ET AL.

, provides, in pertinent part: “On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party to the agreement refuses to arbitrate that controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for rescission

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

LANA SIEU NGU VS CITY BAIL BONDS ET AL

In the Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”), Plaintiff asserted three causes of action for: (1) rescission of contract, or in the alternative, restitution of money paid under void contract (duress and undue influence); (2) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and (3) violation of the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.). .

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

DEREK TSAI VS BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

The Court finds that defendant BMW of North America, LLC has sufficiently established that an agreement to arbitrate the current controversy exist, that there is no showing that there has been any waiver of the right to compel arbitration, and no showing that the agreement has been rescinded or that grounds exist for rescission of the agreement.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

LUIS VILLA VS FCA US, LLC, ET AL.

The complaint seeks as relief: (1) rescission of the purchase contract and/or restitution of all monies expended; and (2) rescission of the purchase contract under California Civil Code, Section 1692. The Court finds that the RISC does not evidence a clear intent to exclude implied warranty claims.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

ELMAR PEREZ VS WB SIMI VALLEY CDJR, LLC, ET AL.

Enforceability – Rescission In opposition, Plaintiff argues that the purported contracts attached to Defendants’ motion were rescinded and are void according to a document signed by the parties. (Perez Decl., Exh. 1.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

SEO BIN HONG VS CLAREMONT GRADUATE UNIVERSITY

Plaintiff filed the FAC against Defendants alleging causes of action for: (1) rescission of contract—undue influence. The Instant Motion On April 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

FELICIA JACINTA ANARO VS MASON-MCDUFFIE MORTGAGE CORPORATION AND U.S. BANK, N.A. ET AL.

Tenth Cause of Action for Rescission: Plaintiff’s cause of action for rescission of her contract fails because it is based on all of the prior causes of action, which also fail. It also fails as to MERS and Mason-McDuffie because MERS and Mason-McDuffie are not parties to plaintiff’s contract. Viterbi v. Wasserman (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 927, 943. MERS and Mason-McDuffie’s demurrers to this cause of action are sustained without leave to amend. U.S.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Judge

    George J. Abdallah

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

CENTERPOINTE TIC #1, LLC, ET AL. VS VEREIT, INC. FKA AMERICAN REALTY CAPITAL PROPERTIES, INC., ET AL.

., § 1281.2) “The court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for rescission of the agreement. . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2) “[W]aivers are not to be lightly inferred and the party seeking to establish a waiver bears a heavy burden of proof.” (St. Agnes Medical Center v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

GLENDALE FRENCH BAKERY, INC. VS. RICK SALVATORE, ET AL

In the operative complaint, Plaintiff alleged twelve causes of action sounding in (1) Breach of Lease, (2) Breach of covenant of Quiet Use and Enjoyment, (3) Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, (4) Fraud, (5) Negligent Misrepresentation, (6) Rescission and Restitution based on Fraud or Mistake, (7) Promissory Estoppel, (8) Interference with Contractual Relations, (9) Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage, (10) Private Nuisance, (11) Public Nuisance, and (12) Violation of Bus. & Prof

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

THOMAS J MEZA, ET AL. VS BASILE & ASSOCIATES, ET AL.

Magnum is a necessary party to this action since it is the owner of record and has a direct interest in the relief sought by plaintiffs, which includes rescission of the trustee’s sale and rescission and cancellation of the trustee’s deed upon sale recorded December 17, 2018. Plaintiffs do not dispute in their opposition that Magnum is an indispensable party.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

AMC, LLC V. OCEANA FOODS

., the petitioner has waived the right to compel arbitration, grounds for rescission exist. Petitioner also served the notice of continuance which moved the hearing date from May 12, 2020 to July 7, 2020. Jurisdiction also appears appropriate under section 1293, which provides the making of an agreement to arbitrate in this state providing for arbitration to be had in this state is “deemed a consent of the parties thereto to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State to enforce such agreement ….”

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

LISA HINES, ET AL. VS SURFACES U.S.A., ET AL.

In short, in rescission cases, a plaintiff is entitled to the “difference between the actual value of that with which the defrauded person parted and the actual value of that which he received, together with additional damage arising from the particular transaction.” (Warfield v. Richey (1959) 167 Cal. App. 2d 93).

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

BEHZAD FORAT ET AL VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

The FAP further alleges that as a result of Defendants’ April 1 and May 13 rescission motions, Forat is unable to proceed with developing and selling the property in accordance with the March 2015 Action. (FAP ¶¶ 36, 38) The FAP alleges that the Defendants’ rescission actions amount to a taking because Defendants “have made it legally and economically impossible for Forat to beneficially and productively use the Property and their actions have significantly impaired the value of the Property[.]”

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

MIGUEL ANGEL OLVERA, ET AL. V. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, INC.

., ¶ 51), Defendant does not make and substantiate a legal argument justifying excision of paragraphs 52–55 about rescission, different types of damages, and penalties for willful violation. For all of these reasons, the Court does not strike paragraphs 51–55 from the complaint. In conclusion, Defendant’s motion to strike is DENIED in its entirety.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

SINGH VS. KAUR

Facts Plaintiffs Mohinder Singh and Kuljinder Kaur filed a complaint seeking rescission and cancellation of a deed which they allege conveyed a 50% interest in their property to their nephew Gurpinder Singh, now deceased. Defendant and moving party Sukhdeep Kaur (“S. Kaur”), alleges she was Gurpinder Singh’s spouse. Plaintiffs served S. Kaur with the summons and complaint by certified mail at an out-of-state address in the State of Washington.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

ANDREA CARRILLO, ET AL. VS PACE FUNDING GROUP, LLC

On 7/9/19, Plaintiffs’ filed their complaint which contains causes of action for: (1) fraudulent inducement, (2) negligence, (3) rescission, (4) violation of Business & Professions Code 17200 and (5) declaratory relief. On 9/13/19, Defendants filed an answer to the complaint. At the 11/5/19 Case Management Conference, the Court set the trial date for 7/27/20. The court may continue the trial date upon a showing of good cause. See Rapid Transit Advocates, Inc. (1986) 185 CA3d 996, 1003; CRC 3.1332(c).

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

SHEERI STEINBERG, ET AL. VS SEAN KNIBB, ET AL.

Demurrer First Cause of Action: Rescission of the Contract A party to a contract may rescind it where the contract is unlawful, was the result of mistake, duress, menace, fraud, or undue influence, or will prejudice the public interest if permitted to stand, or if there was a failure of consideration. (Civ. Code, § 1689, subd. (b).) In the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), Plaintiffs seek to rescind the Prime Construction Contract between them and Defendants Sean Knibb and Knibb Design Corp.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 91     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.