What is slander/disparagement of title?

Useful Resources for Slander or Disparagement of Title

Recent Rulings on Slander or Disparagement of Title

226-250 of 1891 results

CYNTHIA MARIA RIBAS VS BEAU MONDE ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

Ribas (Plaintiff) filed suit against Defendant Beau Monde Association and Sommer Adel Salam (Defendant Rodriguez), alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) libel per se, (4) slander per se, (5) fraud (false promise), (6) negligent misrepresentation, and (7) breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

(“East West Bank”), Agnes Mok, and Steve Ho, for causes of action for: 1) Breach of Contract; 2) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; 3) Invasion of Privacy; 4) Breach of Fiduciary Duty; 5) Defamation-Slander; 6) Interference with Prospective Business Advantage. On February 18, 2020, Ho filed a demurrer to Plaintiffs’ Third, Fifth, and Sixth causes of action. Ho has also filed a motion to strike punitive damages from the FAC.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

GAINQUICK LLC VS JTH HOLDINGS LLC

(Complaint ¶ 78.) (6) Plaintiff was harmed in that it suffered disparagement of title (Complaint ¶ 80) and incurred legal expenses (Complaint ¶ 84). (7) Plaintiff’s harm was proximately caused by CCA’s slander. (Complaint ¶¶ 80 and 84). The parties dispute the question whether malice is a necessary element of a slander of title claim. But as Gudger v. Manton (1943) 21 Cal.2d 537 explained, a publication without privilege or justification constitutes express or implied malice (Id. at p. 264).

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

CYNTHIA MARIA RIBAS VS BEAU MONDE ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

Ribas (Plaintiff) filed suit against Defendant Beau Monde Association and Sommer Adel Salam (Defendant Rodriguez), alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) libel per se, (4) slander per se, (5) fraud (false promise), (6) negligent misrepresentation, and (7) breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

LIJUAN GUAN VS JCP, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ET AL.

Howland (“Howland”), and Travelers Casualty and Surety Company (“Travelers”) alleging causes of action for (1) quiet title, (2) fraud, (3) slander of title, (4) cancellation of deed, (5) declaratory relief, and (6) false notary acknowledgment and the penal sum of a notary bond. The Complaint alleges in pertinent part as follows. Plaintiff Guan has been the owner of the Property since April 11, 2018.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

KASRA PARIVAR VS WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, NA, ET AL.

., LaSalle Bank, NA as Trustee For Securitized Trust WAMU Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 2007-HY7 Trust, and JP Morgan Chase Bank, NA asserting causes of action for 1) Lack of Standing to Foreclose; 2) Breach of Contract; 3) Quiet Title; 4) Slander of Title; 5) Temporary Restraining Order/Injunctive Relief; and 6) Declaratory Relief. Plaintiff brought this action based on the lack of perfected transfer of title to a securitized trust in violation of its own terms and in violation of state law.

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge

    Paul A. Bacigalupo or Virginia Keeny

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LAURA JOANNE MEADOWS VS PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC, ET AL.

Slander of Title; and 13. Cancellation of Instruments are sustained without leave to amend. The 12th cause of action also fails because the alleged slander was privileged conduct. Homeowners’ Bill of Rights The first five causes of action allege violations of this act. The court adopts the following from Defendants’ moving papers: “After a foreclosure has occurred, only monetary damages are available under HOBR. Civ. Code §2824.12(b).

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

PAUL EDALAT VS JOHN J. E. MARKHAM, II, ET AL.

Articles and Press Releases: The one-year statute of limitations for libel and slander pursuant to CCP § 340(c) applies to Defamation. There is no delayed discovery for defamation claims. (Shively v. Bozanich (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1230, 1237.) The statute of limitations starts to run at the time of publication. (Ibid.) The delayed discovery rule applies to “covert defamations,” wherein the defamatory statement was concealed from plaintiff. (Shively v Bozanich (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1230, 1252.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CR CREATIVE SERVICES INC VS HAROLD BRIONES ET AL

“A slander that falls within the first four subdivisions of Civil Code section 46 is slander per se and require no proof of actual damages.” (Regalia v. The Nethercutt Collection (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 361, 367.) The third subdivision of section 46 requires proof that the statement would tend to harm one’s professional reputation: “3.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

REVERSE MORTGAGE SOLUTIONS INC VS KMC LANDSCAPING SERVICES

The contractor subsequently sued the suppliers for libel, slander, and unfair business practices. The suppliers filed a special motion to strike which the trial court denied. The suppliers appealed. (Brown, supra, 137 Cal.App.4th at 1123-24.) On appeal, the suppliers contended that stop notices are generally subject to the litigation privilege. The appellate court concurred.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ANDREW M. EGBE VS SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint asserts causes of action for (1) fraud, (2) wrongful foreclosure, (3) quiet title, (4) declaratory relief, (5) slander of title, (6) slander of credit, (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (8) cancellation of instruments, and (9) unfair business practices. The Complaint alleges in pertinent part as follows. In August 2005, Plaintiff purchased real property located at 3539 South Cochran Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90016 (Property). (Compl. ¶ 13.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

EVAN ISRAEL BRENNER VS MIKA JAYMES INC ET AL

Civil Code section 3425.3 provides as follows: “No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel or slander or invasion of privacy or any other tort founded upon any single publication or exhibition or utterance, such as any one issue of a newspaper or book or magazine or any one presentation to an audience or any one broadcast over radio or television or any one exhibition of a motion picture.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

CITY OF SAN JOSE V. FALCOCCHIA

Constitution; (6) violation of 42 U.S.C. section 1983; (7) invasion of privacy under article I, section I of the California Constitution; (8) Bane Act violations; (9) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (10) unfair and deceptive business practices; and (11) slander of title. The City subsequently demurred to all of the claims asserted in the Falcocchia’s cross- complaint on the ground of failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 43010, subd. (e).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

STEVEN POWERS VS MARCOS VIVIAN, ET AL.

Sixth Cause of Action: Slander of Title The elements of the tort of slander of title are: “(1) publication, (2) absence of justification, (3) falsity and (4) direct pecuniary loss.” (Truck Ins. Exch. v. Bennett (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 75, 84 (Truck Ins.).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ROSEMARY WOODS VS RAZ INVESTMENTS,INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Slander of Title (11th COA) The elements of a cause of action for slander of title are “(1) a publication, (2) which is without privilege or justification, (3) which is false, and (4) which causes direct and immediate pecuniary loss.” (Manhattan Loft, LLC v. Mercury Liquors, Inc. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051.) Plaintiff failed to allege facts to establish a cause of action for slander of title against Raz Defendants.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

LAWRENCE CHIBUEZE, ET AL. VS TELOPS INTERNATIONAL, INC., ET AL.

The Complaint alleges causes of action for: Fraud by intentional misrepresentation and concealment; Negligent hiring and supervision; Slander of title; Trespass to land; Promissory estoppel; and Unfair competition (Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.) Plaintiffs allege causes of action three, four, and six against Ygrene.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

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

Slander of Title: The judicially noticed material facts establish that U.S. Bank’s and MERS’s actions in recording the several notices of default and notices of trustee sale were privileged under Civil Code section 47 in that the deed of trust and subsequent assignments identified U.S. Bank as the beneficiary of the deed of trust and MERS as its agent.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Judge

    George J. Abdallah

  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

RENATO ROBISON VS MARIANAH CREVIOSERAT

By way of background, on February 28, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in this action against Defendant Mariana Crevoiserat (“Mariana”), alleging causes of action for libel per se, slander per se, false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”), libel, slander, and invasion of privacy.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

CHICUACE CHICUACE VS MR. JIMMY A. GOMEZ, ET AL.

ANALYSIS: On September 6, 2019, Plaintiff Chicuace Chicuace (“Plaintiff”) filed the Complaint in this action for slander against Defendants Jimmy A. Gomez and Leonard Mata (“Defendants”). The Summons was issued on December 31, 2019. On March 13, 2019, Defendants filed the instant Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint. To date, no opposition has been filed.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

CLODA JONES VS NAOMI CAMPBELL, ET AL.

Factual Background This is an action for slander of title and cancellation of cloud on title. The Complaint alleges as follows. Plaintiff Cloda A. Jones (“Jones”) is the beneficiary of the Ogilvie Family Trust. Defendant Naomi Campbell (“Campbell”) offered to help Jones administer this trust after the deaths of Jones’ parents, the Ogilvies. (Compl. ¶¶ 2, 12.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

2009 WELLINGTON ROAD, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS MICHELLE HAGUE, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

This argument relates to the third cause of action for slander of title. However, the OSC re: PI is based on the first and second causes of action for declaratory relief and wrongful foreclosure. Defendant cites no authority that the privilege under Civil Code section 2924(b) bars injunctive relief with respect to improper or wrongful foreclosure proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

AASIR AZZARMI VS WENDY CHAU, ET AL.

Relihan, Clifford Schwenker, Hana Bruce, Kristina Keifer, Jazzmaine Francis, Susan Judson, Christ Catania, and Charlotte Ling for (1) defamation-libel, (2) defamation-libel per se, (3) defamation-slander, (4) defamation-slander per se, (5) defamation at common law and pursuant to Civil Code §46, (6) IIED, (7) trade libel, (8) violation of Bus. & Prof.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

MARIELOU MENDOZA VS KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC ET AL

The elements for a cause of action for slander are: 1) false and unprivileged publication; 2) orally uttered to third persons; and 3) naturally tending directly to injure a person, in respect to office, profession, trade or business or special damages. Taus v. Loftus (2007) 40 Cal.4th 683, 720. Defendants argue that the defamation claim is time barred. The statute of limitations for defamation is one year. (CCP § 340(c).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

This argument relates to the third cause of action for slander of title. However, the OSC re: PI is based on the first and second causes of action for declaratory relief and wrongful foreclosure. Defendant cites no authority that the privilege under Civil Code section 2924(b) bars injunctive relief with respect to improper or wrongful foreclosure proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

2009 WELLINGTON ROAD, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS MICHELLE HAGUE, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

This argument relates to the third cause of action for slander of title. However, the OSC re: PI is based on the first and second causes of action for declaratory relief and wrongful foreclosure. Defendant cites no authority that the privilege under Civil Code section 2924(b) bars injunctive relief with respect to improper or wrongful foreclosure proceedings.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  « first    1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 76     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.