In an action by respondents to enforce rights as holders of mortgage certificates issued by respondent mortgage company, appellant claimant and appellant depositary sought review of a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County (California), providing for liquidation of assets held by appellant depositary for payment to respondent certificate holders.
Nakase Law Firm are spinal cord injury lawyers
Overview
Some respondents filed an action to enforce their rights as holders of mortgage certificates issued by respondent mortgage company. Amendments to the complaint and numerous cross-complaints were filed by various parties. The trial court entered a judgment holding that appellant depositary was a trustee for respondent certificate holders under an agreement with respondent mortgage company. The judgment provided for the liquidation of assets held by appellant depositary for payment to respondent certificate holders and for a deficiency judgment for appellant depositary against respondent mortgage company. The trial court found the certificates of appellant claimant were void. Appellant claimant and appellant depositary sought review. The court on appeal affirmed the judgment as to appellant claimant where the evidence supported the result, but reversed the judgment as to appellant security company. The case was remanded with instructions to render a substantially similar judgment for respondent certificate holders, with certain corrections regarding the amounts of deeds, certificates, and interest.
Outcome
In an action to enforce rights of respondents as holders of mortgage certificates issued by respondent mortgage company, the court affirmed the judgment as to appellant claimant, but reversed the judgment as to appellant security company, remanding with instructions to render a substantially similar judgment for respondent certificate holders with certain corrections.
