Specifically, Countrywide Economic contended this new Bank’s area 25504 allege are an identical reason for step as its Point 15 allege within the top rights’ principle. Considering Countrywide Economic, the financial institution desired to hang they liable throughout the Credit Suisse action since the a running people to have so-called misrepresentations for the [residential home loan-supported securities] giving data plus in the declaratory recovery action, the bank tries to hold [Countrywide Monetary] liable once the a running individual for the same so-called misrepresentations on same ? providing data files. Nationwide Economic conceded the legal theories in both cases was various other, but contended the financial institution alleged a pass of the same first proper-the fresh new asserted to providing files free from topic misrepresentations; and, more over, states in both tips to own sustained the same damage because the a direct result [Countrywide’s Financial’s] alleged misconduct.

Countrywide Monetary demurred for the medical amended declaratory rescue problem, competing res judicata banned brand new Bank’s point 25504 allege once the Bank is actually impermissibly seeking relitigate a factor in step that has been ignored with prejudice in a past action within exact same functions

As well, the lending company contended there clearly was no finally view into the merits regarding Borrowing Suisse step given that the states on each securitization in question inside Borrowing Suisse have been part of an individual factor in step to possess purposes of res judicata. Since the Lender told me, a lot of the Bank’s states with the those ties on the Borrowing Suisse action are still pending. Hence, there have been zero finally judgment to the merits of one’s Bank’s whole factor in action with the all five ties regarding the Credit Suisse action that are as well as the topic off this[.] 5

When you look at the opposition, the financial institution argued this new area 25504 allege they asserted on the declaratory save step is actually not the same as brand new states one to [it] voluntarily overlooked within the Borrowing from the bank Suisse and this res judicata failed to club it from asserting different says under a separate statute

The latest courtroom noticed, [t]the guy actual matter let me reveal whether or not that was overlooked ‘s the exact same number one best as to what is considered right here [in the declaratory rescue action]. Then your courtroom answered the question from the affirmative. They informed me, the new Ties Work and you can areas 25401 and you will 25501 give control individuals responsible underneath the exact same situations ? without any significant difference underneath the government system or perhaps the condition scheme? And California law isnt materially unlike the new federal law. The newest judge went on, an over-all concept from inside the preclusive impact jurisprudence is the fact that [c]ourt isnt bound by the latest structure, or the pleadings, or even the articulation on the reasons for step. Put another way ? you never have a look at reasons for step ? or components of trigger[s] away from step www.paydayloanalabama.com/loachapoka. You reach the center of what is going on. Also it seems to me that the heart of what actually is happening, from this direction ? is actually handle people accountability. That under a federal statute and something below your state statute. No amount the way you beg it or precisely what the sequence is actually, ? that it is a comparable in the two cases.

I comment de- novo brand new court’s purchase retaining Countrywide’s demurrer as opposed to exit so you’re able to amend. (Home out of Dito (2011) 198 Cal.Application.fourth 791, 800 (Dito ).) I first feedback the new problem de- novo to determine when it include activities enough to county a factor in action around people court concept. [Admission.] I beat brand new demurrer given that admitting every thing circumstances properly pleaded, but not contentions, write-offs otherwise conclusions of-fact otherwise law. [Admission.] I contemplate issues which are often judicially seen.’ [Solution.] ‘ [Citation.] I affirm if any crushed offered in support of demurrer are well taken but come across mistake should your plaintiff has stated a cause of step less than any potential judge idea. [Citations.] We are not limited by the newest demo court’s stated explanations, or no, supporting their governing; we opinion the ruling, not their rationale. [Citation.]’ [Violation.] (Id. in the p. 800.)