Javaheri v. JPMorgan Chase finally !!

23 Jun


Federal District Court

Javaheri v. JPMorgan Chase, Case No. CV10-8185 ODW

Otis D. Wright II, Judge, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Los Angeles
Douglas Gillies, attorney for Daryoush Javaheri

Plaintiff sued to halt a foreclosure initiated by JPMorgan Chase and California Reconveyance Co. Chase responded with a Motion to Dismiss. Two times the court granted Chase’s motion with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint and Chase again moved to dismiss.

In opposing the motion, Plaintiff requested that the court take judicial notice of:

(1) the Congressional Oversight Panel November Oversight Report (COP Report) released on November 16, 2010 –

(2) Federal Reserve System Consent Order in the Matter of JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., Docket No. 11-023-B-HC and 11- 023-B-DEO, dated April 13, 2011 –

Judge Wright denied Chase’s motion to dismiss five causes of action – wrongful foreclosure, quiet title, violation of Cal Civ. Code Sec. 2923.5, quasi contract, and declaratory relief.

2 Responses to “Javaheri v. JPMorgan Chase finally !!”

  1. Nora June 23, 2011 at 6:29 pm #

    Great case, yes finally some things are turning out for the better for some homeowners especially here in CA. I am truly glad to see a judge finally seeing through how Chase tried to babble their way through the case and ignore facts that prove that they don’t have any interest in the NOTE. It has been proven that banks tried to ram cases through the system without the legal rights to foreclose on millions of homes, that they truly believe that they are right to foreclose is outrageous. And just because JPMorgan Chase was given WAMU’s assets, etc does not give them the automatic right to own any mortgages that were securitized before the acquisition. And Chase does not like to have people call them rubbers, well they are, they stole those homes they foreclosed on, because as we can see they never had the right to the those homes. It’s just amazing to me that Chase kept saying that the plaintiff did not provide evidence yet they themselves did not provide evidence to the contrary. There has been enough evidence in the many cases prior to this one but I don’t think that they were pleaded properly. This attorney, Mr. Gillies covered quiet a bit more than other attorneys have, which is what made the difference in this case. I wonder now that after this case others will look into finding Chase not having the legal standing to have foreclosed on prior homes, I sure hope so! And yes it is true, the public’s view of the due process on foreclosure has been jaded for the last few years, perhaps a case like this one can help reshape the opinions of the public, perhaps even mine!!!

  2. Rhonda July 19, 2011 at 1:42 pm #

    This information is awesome & uplifting… its enough to give me hope. Are there any cases such as this against Wells Fargo?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: