Khurana

Khurana v. CitiMortgage CA1/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 29, 2022A161003California5,911 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 6/29/22 Khurana v. CitiMortgage CA1/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

ANITA KHURANA et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,

A161003

v. CITIMORTGAGE, INC., (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. C17-00101) Defendant and Respondent.

In January 2017, Anita and Mahesh Khurana (the Khuranas) sued CitiMortgage, Inc. (Citi) for failing to appoint an adequate single point of contact to handle their request for a modification of their home loan. The Khuranas sought damages and an injunction preventing non-judicial foreclosure pursuant to causes of action for negligence, unfair business practices and violations of the Homeowner Bill of Rights, commonly referred to as the HBOR. (Civ. Code, §§ 2920.5, 2923.4–2923.7, 2924, 2924.9–2924.12, 2924.15,…

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.