Sterling Mortensen v. Countrywide Bank, Fsb

Good Law
662 F. App'x 501
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 5, 201613-35286California590 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Sterling J. Mortensen and Maureen Mortensen appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging federal and state law claims related to the foreclosure of their property. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the Mortensens’ claim for damages under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) because it is barred by the statute of limitations and the Mortensens failed to plead facts demonstrating that equitable tolling should apply. See 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (e) (an action for damages under TILA must be brought within one year of the alleged violation).

The district court properly dismissed Mortensens’ claim for rescission under TILA because the Mortensens have not alleged that they intend to or are able to tender the amount loaned. See Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are liberally construed, a plaintiff must still present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief);…

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.