Just like the plaintiff is not a federal government authoritative or staff, and since defendants failed to document encumbrances from the debated possessions while the retribution for formal governmental commitments, plaintiff don’t condition a statutory claim for incorrect encumbrance.
As stated in the Opinion, the fact that these documents were recorded in Lane County does not establish that they were in anyway invalid. Opinion at 21. Plaintiff does not explain how these documents are “defective”; as such, plaintiff cannot state a claim for relief because she dose not allege “sufficient . . . underlying facts” in support of her claim. Starr, 652 F.3d at 1216.
Moreover, plaintiff’s assertion that defendants had knowledge of the allegedly invalid encumbrances “because they each had persons in their employ who . . . create[d] fictitious documents” is similarly vague and conclusory. Thus, plaintiff is again merely asserting the elements of a claim, without identifying any particular facts entitling her to relief. Get a hold of Or. Rev. Stat. (“[a]ny person who knowingly files, or directs another to file, an invalid claim of encumbrance shall Arkansas loans be liable to the owner of the property”). Plaintiff’s invalid encumbrance claim is improperly plead and therefore dismissed.
To get their particular claim, plaintiff links a duplicate from a great “report out-of hardship” letter she sent to the lending company out-of America Home loans program and you can that loan modification request setting you to she delivered to “BAC – Family Storage Office – (One Representative)
After that, due to the fact fundamental basis in the allege is defendants’ alleged con in making and you can recording brand new allegedly “defective” records, plaintiff have to meet the increased pleading criteria detail by detail during the Provided. R. Civ. P. 9(b). As a result, plaintiff’s claim goes wrong for it additional reason. Defendants’ activity was therefore offered on plaintiff’s 6th claim.
Plaintiff alleges you to Stacy Blouin, a member of staff off BNYM, lied inside her affidavit by testifying you to she hadn’t received an ask for an event or loan modification
Plaintiff’s final claim is for civil perjury. SAC 62. In addition, plaintiff contends that w[t]he assertion that Stacy L. Blouin was acting for BNYM was knowingly false [because] Ms. Blouin was acting for [BAC and ReconTrust].” Id. Plaintiff’s seventh claim fails for two reasons.
First, plaintiff has not cited to, and this Court is not aware of, any authority which supports a civil cause of action for perjury. The Oregon statutes that govern perjury are all criminal in nature. See Or. Rev. Stat. , , . Moreover, while Oregon has not explicitly addressed this issue, all other districts within this Circuit have uniformly held that “there is no civil cause of action for perjury; it is a criminal offense.” Lowrv v. City. Transit, 2010 WL 2485611, *2 (S.D.Cal. trak Rys., USA, 2010 WL 891933, *2 (E.D.Cal. ) (“California law does not recognize a civil cause of action for perjury”); FMC Specialists., Inc. v. Edwards, 464 F.Supp.2d 1063, 1067 (W.D.Wash. 2006) (“there is no civil cause of action for perjury”); Ting v. You, 927 F.2d 1504, 1515 (9th Cir. 1991) (“a civil action for damages for injuries arising from false testimony or perjury is not recognized in California”). As such, plaintiff is unable to state a claim for civil perjury, as no such cause of action exists.
2nd, whether or not perjury was a beneficial cognizable civil claim, plaintiff has never alleged one affairs, past mere conclusory allegations, one Ms. Blouin lied inside her affidavit or was pretending poorly when it comes to BNYM. ” SAC Ex. B, at the step 3-5. These types of data, not, are not able to show that Ms. Blouin in fact gotten otherwise got knowledge of this type of data files, especially simply because they were not treated so you’re able to their unique. As such, plaintiff doesn’t condition a state having civil perjury; consequently, defendants’ motion is actually granted because respect.