During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Financial Services

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

So long as the landlord does not contract with them and does not demand or accept rent from them, the landlord need not let subtenants cure the tenant's rent default.  Accordingly, the landlord's 3-day notice to quit served on the subtenants was proper though it did not offer them the alternative of curing the tenant's rent default.  Also, under San… Read More

Following Nolte v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 1401, this decision holds that it is not an unfair or unlawful business practice for a hospital not to affirmatively disclose, prior to treatment, that it will charge an emergency room charge to patients using the emergency room.  Extensive state and federal statutes and regulations require specific sorts of disclosures of… Read More

CCP 1161.3 provides that a landlord may not terminate a tenancy for (among other things) domestic violence committed against the tenant or a member of the tenant's household so long as the domestic violence is documented by, among other alternatives, a police report.  Over a dissent, this opinion holds that the statute provides a defense to an unlawful detainer action… Read More

Before and during his decade-long divorce proceedings, Piterman made monthly payments on two promissory notes to his friend Korchemny, who then with Piterman's encouragement and aid sued Piterman, his former wife and her trust to collect on the notes.  This opinion affirms a judgment against Korchemny on the complaint.  The first promissory note charged interest in excess of 10% and… Read More

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion for an attorney fee award on the ground that neither party had prevailed in the action.  Plaintiff tenant sued his landlord, asked the jury to award him $200,000 but recovered a jury verdict of only $6,450.  In view of plaintiff's recovery of such a small percentage of the… Read More

The res judicata/collateral estoppel effect of a post-foreclosure unlawful detainer judgment extends only to proper conduct of the trustee's sale, not to claims of earlier wrongs committed by the lender that purportedly led eventually to the foreclosure.  Thus, here, the unlawful detainer judgment against the borrowers did not preclude them from later suing on a claim that the lender had… Read More

A party cannot acquire good title by adverse possession against the beneficiary of a deed of trust that was recorded on the property before the alleged adverse possession began.  This is for third reasons.  First, the beneficiary has no right to possession of the property until after foreclosure on the deed of trust.  Since the beneficiary cannot oust the alleged… Read More

The tenant served his summary judgment motion one day late in this UD action, six days before the hearing rather than the required seven for service by express mail.  Nevertheless, the the judgment is affirmed.  Plaintiff filed an opposition.  Though complaining about the short service, it did not claim any prejudice.  Also, there was no record of oral proceedings at… Read More

Borrower's fourth mortgage foreclosure delay suit was properly dismissed as barred by the res judicata effect of the prior three judgments against her, two of which had been affirmed on appeal.  All the actions involved the same cause of action as they all asserted a violation of borrower's ownership interest in the property that was subject to her deed of… Read More

Defendant initially violated HBOR by refusing to consider plaintiff's loan modification application because only his deceased wife was the borrower on the loan, but defendant cured its violation after suit was filed by canceling the pending foreclosure, accepting and review plaintiff's loan modification application, and offering him a trial payment plan intended to lead to a loan modification.  Thinking he… Read More

1 2 3 15