Particularly, Countrywide Economic argued brand new Bank’s area 25504 allege is a comparable cause of action as the Section fifteen claim beneath the number one rights’ principle. Considering Nationwide Financial, the financial institution needed to hang they accountable about Credit Suisse step just like the a control person having alleged misrepresentations within the [domestic mortgage-recognized bonds] offering files and in the new declaratory rescue action, the bank tries to hang [Nationwide Economic] responsible given that a control individual for similar so-called misrepresentations in the same ? giving documents. Nationwide Economic conceded the legal concepts in the two cases was in fact some other, but debated the financial institution so-called a solution of the identical no. 1 right-the brand new asserted straight to providing records free of question misrepresentations; and you can, additionally, states in strategies to have sustained an equivalent spoil because the a direct result [Countrywide’s Financial’s] alleged misconduct.
Countrywide Economic demurred to your surgical amended declaratory rescue complaint, contending res judicata banned the newest Bank’s area 25504 claim because Financial are impermissibly trying to relitigate a cause of action that has been ignored that have bias inside a prior step within same functions
As well, the bank argued there was zero latest judgment towards merits about Borrowing Suisse step once the its claims on every securitization at issue in Borrowing Suisse was indeed element of an individual cause for step to possess purposes of res judicata. As Financial told me, a lot of the Bank’s says into the men and women bonds in the Borrowing Suisse step will still be pending. Therefore, there’s been zero last view on the merits of one’s Bank’s whole factor in step into the all four securities from the Borrowing Suisse action which might be also the topic away from this action[.] 5
Inside opposition, the lending company debated this new area 25504 claim they asserted on declaratory relief action try distinctive from the newest says you to [it] willingly overlooked in the Borrowing Suisse and therefore res judicata failed to pub it off saying different says not as much as yet another statute
The newest legal observed, [t]he genuine matter we have found whether or not what was disregarded ‘s the same primary right in what is considered here [on the declaratory save action]. Then your courtroom responded the question on affirmative. They explained, the newest Securities Operate and you may sections 25401 and you may 25501 provide control people in charge according to the same issues ? without any significant difference under the federal program or the state scheme? And the California statute is not materially different from the newest federal law. The judge proceeded, a broad design in preclusive feeling jurisprudence is that the [c]ourt isnt bound by new style, or the pleadings, or perhaps the articulation regarding factors that cause step. Put another way ? you do not see causes of step ? or areas of bring about[s] of step. You reach one’s heart of what is taking place. And it appears to myself the heart of what actually is going on, using this perspective ? was manage loan places Edwards people accountability. You to below a federal statute plus one below a state law. Without amount the method that you plead it or what the sequence is actually, ? that it’s the same in both cases.
We review de- novo the brand new court’s acquisition preserving Countrywide’s demurrer instead of leave so you can amend. (House regarding Dito (2011) 198 Cal.Software.next 791, 800 (Dito ).) I very first comment the fresh new complaint de novo to decide when it include issues sufficient to state a factor in action lower than one legal theory. [Solution.] We eradicate the fresh new demurrer because admitting all the procedure circumstances properly pleaded, although not contentions, write-offs or findings of fact otherwise laws. [Admission.] I contemplate matters which is often judicially observed.’ [Citation.] ‘ [Pass.] We affirm or no floor offered in help of demurrer is well-taken however, see error whether your plaintiff has stated a factor in action significantly less than any possible court concept. [Citations.] We are really not limited by the latest trial court’s stated reasons, or no, support its ruling; we feedback the latest ruling, perhaps not the rationale. [Pass.]’ [Solution.] (Id. on p. 800.)