Search anything: judges, parties, opposing counsel, motion types, legal issues
Deborah C SERVINO Track Judge
(Subscribe to View) Track This Case
December 18, 2020
Orange County, CA
C21
Civil
Lester V. Westco Group, Inc., Et Al.
Affiliated Partners, Ipa V. Macarthur Court Acquisition Corp., Et Al.
Norlund V. Kirk, Et Al.
Stephan V. Costco Wholesale Corporation
Nickel V. The Huntington Beach Gables Homeowners Association, Et Al.
Nelson V. Orange County Global Medical Center, Inc.
Clark, Et Al. V. Mulford, Et Al.
Ilnitskaya V. Assent Mortgage, Llc, Et Al.
Johnston V. Hunter, Et Al.
Plaintiff Well Fargo Bank, N.A.’s unopposed motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Complaint alleges six causes of action against Defendant Ramin Modiri for breach of contract and common counts. On June 26, 2020, Defendant filed his Answer and admitted “all of the statements of the complaint [] are true,” except, Defendant explained he “tried to settle this case [] numerous times.” (ROA 8 [Answer at p. 1, ¶ 3.b.].) Under affirmative defenses, Defendant further explained he contacted Plaintiff “from 06/2018 till 03/2019 to make financial arrangements,” and, “while other financial organizations worked with Defendant to make arrangements,” Plaintiff “would not agree.” (Answer at p. 2, ¶ 4.) Applicable Law A motion for judgment on the pleadings has the same function as a general demurrer. (People v. $20,000 U.S. Currency (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 682, 691.) Where, as here, the plaintiff is moving for judgment on its own pleading, the motion shall be mad........
Your alert tracking was succesfully added. We will email you when new changes related to are available.
You can see and mange all your Tracking alerts under Alert Settings
Add to your subscription and access more dockets and more documents!
Your subscription was successfully upgraded
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Modiri
Case No.: 30-2019-01067609