Drakeford
Drakeford v. Capital Benefit, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 RHONDA DRAKEFORD, et al., Case No. 20-cv-04161-WHO
Plaintiffs,
ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARAY
v. RESTRAINING ORDER
CAPITAL BENEFIT, INC., et al., Re: Dkt. No. 8 Defendants.
Having considered plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to prevent defendants from proceeding with a non-judicial foreclosure on their residence set for July 2, 2020 (Dkt. No. 8) and defendants’ opposition (Dkt. No. 13), as well as the supporting declarations and exhibits, plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED.1 The main, and for purposes of this TRO, only dispute between the parties is whether the loan provided by defendants, secured by plaintiffs’ residence, was made primarily for “business purposes.” If it was, the loan is exempt from the protections provided for consumers under the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and the foreclosure may procced. If it was not made primarily for business purposes, then the loan is arguably subject to rescission under…