Legal Opinion

Bank of America v. Mitchell

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 10, 2012No. B233924PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SUZUKAWA, J.

—Appellant Bank of America’s (Bank) predecessor in interest loaned respondent Michael Mitchell (Mitchell) $315,000 to purchase a home, secured by two notes and first and second deeds of trust. When Mitchell defaulted on the loan, the lender foreclosed and sold the property. The lender then assigned the second deed of trust to the Bank, which initiated the present action to recover the indebtedness evidenced by the note. Mitchell demurred, and the court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, concluding that the Bank’s action was barred by California’s antideficiency…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  2. McCall v. PacifiCare of California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Roseleaf Corp. v. ChierighinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Connerly v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Wells v. Marina City Properties, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1981

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Venture v. LobelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. Black Sky Capital, LLC v. CobbCalifornia Supreme Court · 2019
  3. Dampier v. Solar & Environmental Technologies CA4/3California Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. Hahn v. Wells Fargo Bank CA2/6California Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. Rodriguez v. Bank of America CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2015

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API