Liou v. Stonecrest Financial, Inc.
- Sallie Kim
- 3:25-cv-06184
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Liou v. Stonecrest Financial, Judge Chen denied Liou’s temporary restraining-order motion because the foreclosure sales had occurred and irreparable harm was not shown.
Bethany Liou, Stonecrest Financial, Inc., and the other defendants; the order concerns foreclosure sales involving an Atherton property and parcels in Tulare County, California.
What happened
Bethany Liou asked the court to stop Stonecrest Financial, Inc. and the other defendants from proceeding with foreclosure sales involving an Atherton property and parcels in Tulare County, California. The opinion states that the sales had already occurred, so Liou no longer owned the properties and there was nothing left to stop.
The court also noted that Liou had released all claims related to the properties and foreclosure sales. It therefore denied the motion for a temporary restraining order and order to show cause for failure to establish irreparable harm. It also denied as moot Liou’s motions seeking judicial approval to record notices of the lawsuit in the property records.
In Liou v. Stonecrest Financial, Inc., Judge Edward M. Chen issued the order on August 4, 2025. The order addresses only the requested temporary relief and the related property-recording motions.
The detailed version
- Liou v. Stonecrest Financial, Inc. · No. 3:25-cv-06184
- Sallie Kim
- Aug. 4, 2025
Background
Bethany Liou moved for a temporary restraining order (an emergency order intended to prevent threatened harm) and an order to show cause. She sought to stop Stonecrest Financial, Inc. and the other defendants from moving forward with foreclosure sales involving a property in Atherton, California, and parcels of land in Tulare County, California.
Court’s reasoning
The court explained that a party seeking temporary injunctive relief must show, among other things, that likely irreparable harm will occur without the requested relief. The court found that Liou did not meet that requirement. The foreclosure sales had already occurred, according to deeds attached to the filings. As a result, Liou no longer owned the properties, and there was nothing left for the court to enjoin. The court also stated that Liou had released all claims related to the properties and the foreclosure sales, citing forbearance agreements and a stipulation for judgment.
Ruling
The court denied Liou’s motion for a temporary restraining order and order to show cause for failure to establish irreparable harm. It also denied as moot her motions for judicial approval to record notices of the lawsuit in the property records. The opinion does not decide the underlying merits of any remaining claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.