Particularly, Nationwide Financial debated the fresh new Bank’s section 25504 claim was an identical cause for step as its Point 15 claim underneath the number one rights’ theory. Considering Countrywide Economic, the financial institution sought for to hang they liable regarding the Credit Suisse step just like the a running person to possess so-called misrepresentations during the [home-based financial-backed securities] offering data files and also in the declaratory save action, the financial institution seeks to hang [Nationwide Financial] accountable just like the an operating individual for similar so-called misrepresentations regarding same ? offering data files. Countrywide Economic conceded this new courtroom ideas in both cases was in fact different, but contended the financial institution alleged a ticket of the identical no. 1 proper-the fresh asserted straight to offering data files without matter misrepresentations; and you can, moreover, states both in steps getting suffered a similar damage given that a direct result [Countrywide’s Financial’s] so-called misconduct.

Nationwide Economic demurred for the operative revised declaratory save ailment, competing res judicata prohibited new Bank’s point 25504 claim given that Lender try impermissibly trying relitigate a cause of step that was ignored having bias within the a previous action within same activities

At the same time, the bank contended discover no finally judgment with the merits about Credit Suisse step since their states for each securitization in question into the Borrowing from the bank Suisse was basically part of just one factor in action to possess purposes of res judicata. Since Financial explained, the vast majority of Bank’s states to the those individuals bonds from the Borrowing from the bank Suisse step remain pending. Thus, there have been no finally judgment on the merits of your Bank’s entire reason for step into the five bonds regarding the Borrowing from the bank Suisse step that will be along with the topic regarding this task[.] 5

Inside opposition, the financial institution contended the newest point 25504 allege it asserted throughout the declaratory rescue action is actually distinct from the fresh says one to [it] voluntarily ignored inside Borrowing from the bank Suisse and that res judicata don’t club it from saying more states less than an alternate law

The newest legal observed, [t]the guy actual question let me reveal if what was overlooked ‘s the same number 1 proper as to what is claimed here [regarding the declaratory recovery step]. Then your legal replied the question regarding affirmative. They informed me, the brand new Ties Operate and you may sections 25401 and 25501 https://paydayloanalabama.com/millport/ offer control people responsible beneath the exact same points ? without any significant difference underneath the federal scheme and/or state scheme? Plus the California statute is not materially not the same as the latest government statute. The fresh new judge continued, an over-all concept inside the preclusive effect jurisprudence is that the [c]ourt isnt limited by the new format, or the pleadings, or the articulation regarding factors behind action. To phrase it differently ? you do not glance at causes of action ? otherwise parts of result in[s] of action. You are able to the heart of what is taking place. Also it seems to me that the cardio of what is happening, using this angle ? try manage person accountability. That lower than a federal statute and another around your state statute. And no amount the manner in which you ask they or exactly what the sequence are, ? that it’s an identical in both cases.

We opinion de- novo new court’s purchase retaining Countrywide’s demurrer rather than get-off so you can amend. (Property of Dito (2011) 198 Cal.Software.next 791, 800 (Dito ).) We first review the fresh new problem de- novo to decide in the event it include factors enough to state a cause of step lower than any court concept. [Pass.] We clean out new demurrer due to the fact admitting all the issue issues securely pleaded, however contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact otherwise legislation. [Solution.] I contemplate things which are judicially seen.’ [Ticket.] ‘ [Solution.] We affirm if any floor offered in assistance of your own demurrer was well taken but select mistake whether your plaintiff states a factor in action around any possible courtroom theory. [Citations.] We’re not limited by the latest demonstration court’s mentioned factors, if any, help its governing; i remark the fresh governing, maybe not its rationale. [Citation.]’ [Ticket.] (Id. on p. 800.)