David Lazerson v. Caliber Home Loans, Inc.
- Jeffrey White
- 4:18-cv-05563
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Lazerson v. Caliber Home Loans, Judge White granted NewRez LLC’s motion to intervene solely to seek removal of a recorded lis pendens.
NewRez LLC may participate in the case for the limited purpose of seeking removal of the recorded lis pendens. David Lazerson may renew his arguments against removal, while the court did not decide the merits of whether the lis pendens should remain.
What happened
David Lazerson sued Caliber Home Loans, Inc. NewRez LLC, which received an assignment of the deed of trust on the property involved in the case, asked to join the lawsuit so it could seek removal of a recorded notice affecting the property.
The court found that NewRez satisfied the requirements for intervention under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24, either as a matter of right or with the court’s permission. Lazerson’s opposition focused on why the notice should remain, rather than addressing those intervention requirements.
Judge Jeffrey White granted NewRez’s motion to intervene for the limited purpose of seeking removal of the 2018 notice. The court did not decide whether the notice should actually be removed, and Lazerson may renew his arguments when that issue is considered.
The detailed version
- David Lazerson v. Caliber Home Loans, Inc. · No. 4:18-cv-05563
- Jeffrey White
- Aug. 30, 2023
Background
David Lazerson sued Caliber Home Loans, Inc. During the litigation, Lazerson recorded a lis pendens, which is a notice concerning pending litigation that is recorded against real property. After the court denied Lazerson’s motion to remand and granted Caliber’s motion for judgment on the pleadings with leave to amend, Lazerson did not amend his complaint. Lazerson and Caliber instead stipulated to dismiss the case, but Lazerson did not withdraw the lis pendens.
Caliber assigned the deed of trust on the property at issue to NewRez LLC, formerly known as New Penn Financial, LLC and doing business as Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, in January 2023. NewRez moved to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 so it could file a motion to expunge, or remove, the lis pendens.
Court’s analysis
The court considered both intervention as of right under Rule 24(a) and permissive intervention under Rule 24(b). Intervention as of right requires a significant protectable interest relating to the property or transaction, possible impairment of that interest, a timely application, and inadequate representation by the existing parties. Permissive intervention requires an independent basis for jurisdiction, a timely motion, and a common question of law or fact with the main action; even when those requirements are met, the court has discretion to deny permission.
The court noted that Lazerson’s opposition did not address the factors governing intervention. Instead, it argued why the lis pendens should remain in place. The court concluded that NewRez had shown that intervention was warranted, whether as a matter of right or by permission.
Ruling
Judge Jeffrey S. White granted NewRez’s motion to intervene. The intervention was limited to allowing NewRez to seek expungement of the lis pendens recorded in 2018. The court expressly did not decide the merits of a future motion to expunge, and stated that Lazerson could renew the arguments made in opposition to intervention when that motion is considered.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.