Camenisch
Camenisch v. Umpqua Bank
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SHELA CAMENISCH, et al., Case No. 20-cv-05905-RS Plaintiffs, 11 v. ORDER RE CHOICE OF LAW AND PREJUDGMENT INTEREST CLAIM
UMPQUA BANK,
13 Defendant.
15 The factual and procedural background of this action has been set out in prior orders and will not be recounted here. Defendant now moves for (1) a determination that California law cannot be applied to the claims of at least some of the plaintiff class members who currently reside in other states or in foreign countries, and that therefore partial decertification is warranted, and (2) summary judgment that plaintiffs will not be entitled to prejudgment interest even if they prevail on the merits of their claims.1 Both motions will be denied.
22 23 24 25 26 1 Umpqua also seeks a ruling that plaintiffs are not entitled to damages arising from any pre-2007 investments. Plaintiffs have disclaimed any intent to pursue such damages and will be held to that A. …