Particularly, Countrywide Monetary contended the brand new Bank’s part 25504 claim are an equivalent cause for step as the Area 15 allege under the number one rights’ principle. According to Nationwide Monetary, the lending company needed to hang they accountable on Borrowing Suisse step once the an operating people to possess so-called misrepresentations in [domestic mortgage-backed bonds] giving data files along with the declaratory recovery action, the financial institution aims to hold [Nationwide Monetary] responsible due to the fact a running person for the very same alleged misrepresentations about exact same ? offering data files. Nationwide Economic conceded this new legal concepts in both cases was some other, but debated the bank alleged a solution of the same top right-new asserted right to providing data without procedure misrepresentations; and you can, moreover, states in both tips for sustained a comparable damage because a direct result [Countrywide’s Financial’s] alleged misconduct.
Nationwide Financial demurred towards the medical revised declaratory rescue complaint, competing res judicata barred the newest Bank’s point 25504 claim since the Financial is actually impermissibly trying to relitigate a cause of action which was dismissed with prejudice inside the an earlier step amongst the exact same activities
At the same time, the bank contended you will find no latest judgment into the deserves about Borrowing Suisse step because the the claims on every securitization at issue from inside the Borrowing from the bank Suisse have been part of an individual reason behind step for reason for res judicata. Once the Financial told me, the vast majority of Bank’s states to the those individuals bonds in the Borrowing Suisse action are nevertheless pending. Thus, there’ve been zero finally judgment on the merits of your own Bank’s entire factor in step towards any of the four securities from the Borrowing from the bank Suisse step which can be and the topic of this[.] 5
During the opposition, the bank contended the newest section 25504 allege it asserted regarding declaratory rescue action is actually not the same as the says one to [it] willingly dismissed in Borrowing Suisse and that res judicata did not club it out-of asserting other says around a special law
The fresh legal noticed, [t]he actual concern let me reveal whether the thing that was disregarded 's the exact same number 1 proper in what is considered right here [throughout the declaratory relief step]. Then your judge responded practical question on the affirmative. They explained, the latest Securities Act and parts 25401 and 25501 offer manage people in control within the exact same circumstances ? with no significant difference under the federal plan and/or state scheme? Additionally the Ca law is not materially not the same as the federal statute. The courtroom continued, a general layout within the preclusive impression jurisprudence is the fact that [c]ourt is not limited browse around these guys by the style, or perhaps the pleadings, or the articulation on causes of action. In other words ? you don’t glance at factors that cause action ? or parts of bring about[s] out-of action. You reach the center of what actually is taking place. Therefore appears to me personally the cardio of what actually is taking place, out of this perspective ? is manage individual liability. One below a federal law and one around a state statute. No number how you beg it or just what sequence try, ? that it’s the same in both cases.
I feedback de- novo this new court’s buy retaining Countrywide’s demurrer as opposed to hop out in order to amend. (Property regarding Dito (2011) 198 Cal.Software.fourth 791, 800 (Dito ).) I very first feedback brand new complaint de novo to decide in the event it contains items enough to state a cause of action below people legal theory. [Violation.] We eradicate the demurrer given that admitting all the issue affairs safely pleaded, yet not contentions, deductions otherwise findings of-fact or legislation. [Ticket.] We contemplate issues which is often judicially seen.’ [Admission.] ’ [Solution.] We affirm or no ground offered in assistance of your demurrer are well-taken but come across mistake when your plaintiff states a cause of action around any possible courtroom concept. [Citations.] We’re not limited by this new demo court’s stated reasons, or no, supporting their ruling; i feedback the brand new ruling, not its rationale. [Ticket.]’ [Pass.] (Id. on p. 800.)