Sorokko

Sorokko v. Bank of America CA1/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 2015A140544California6,832 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bruiniers, J.

I. BACKGROUND

“Because the function of a demurrer is not to test the truth or accuracy of the facts alleged in the complaint, we assume the truth of all properly pleaded factual allegations. [Citation.] Whether the plaintiff will be able to prove these allegations is not relevant; our focus is on the legal sufficiency of the complaint.” (Los Altos Golf & Country Club v. County of Santa Clara (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 198, 203.)

1 A. Loan Modification Negotiations In 2005, Sorokko closed on a mortgage loan (Loan) secured by his Mill Valley home. The Loan was later acquired by BANA. Sorokko stopped making payments on the Loan in about July 2009. 1. 2009 Communications with BANA In October 2009, Sorokko received from BANA an “Important Message About Your Loan,” which offered him an opportunity to “save your home” via alternatives to foreclosure that included “Loan Modification, Repayment Arrangements, Deed-in-Lieu, Short Sale/Payoff, [and] Full Reinstatement.” Sorokko called the telephone number provided in the message several times and “was promised by [BANA’s] representatives in departments variously titled ‘foreclosure avoidance,’ ‘modification department,’ ‘customer…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.