RE: Estrada v. Civic Financial Services, LLC, et al. (18PSCV00168)
______________________________________________________________________________
Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC’s DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT
Responding Party: Plaintiff Jose Estrada[1]
Tentative Ruling
Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC’s demurrer to the first through twelfth and
fifteenth causes of action in Plaintiff’s complaint is SUSTAINED. The court will hear from
Plaintiff as to whether leave to amend is requested, and as to which cause(s) of action, and
will require an offer of proof if so.
Background
Plaintiff Jose Estrada (“Plaintiffs”) alleges that on or about December 6, 2016, Plaintiff entered into a mortgage loan with Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC (“Civic”), which was secured by a trust deed on Plaintiff’s residential property located at 20909 Ambushers Street, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Plaintiff alleges that Civic sold Plaintiff a deceptive loan product which Civic knew
Type
Mortgage Foreclosure (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
RE: Estrada v. Civic Financial Services, LLC, et al. (18PSCV00168)
______________________________________________________________________________
Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC’s DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S
COMPLAINT
Responding Party: Plaintiff Jose Estrada[1]
Tentative Ruling
Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC’s demurrer to the first through twelfth and
fifteenth causes of action in Plaintiff’s complaint is SUSTAINED. The court will hear from
Plaintiff as to whether leave to amend is requested, and as to which cause(s) of action, and
will require an offer of proof if so.
Background
Plaintiff Jose Estrada (“Plaintiffs”) alleges that on or about December 6, 2016, Plaintiff entered into a mortgage loan with Defendant Civic Financial Services, LLC (“Civic”), which was secured by a trust deed on Plaintiff’s residential property located at 20909 Ambushers Street, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. Plaintiff alleges that Civic sold Plaintiff a deceptive loan product which Civic knew