First Citizens Bank v. Frank CA2/5 filed 2/5/13 A

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » 2nd Appellate District » 2013 » First Citizens Bank v. Frank CA2/5 filed 2/5/13 A

State: California

Court: California Eastern District Court

Docket No: B237283

Case Date: 02/05/2013

Plaintiff: First Citizens Bank

Defendant: Frank CA2/5 filed 2/5/13 Case Details

Preview:Filed 2/5/13 First Citizens Bank v. Frank CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE

FIRST CITIZENS BANK, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAVID FRANK et al., Defendants and Appellants.

B237283 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC426784)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. David L. Minning, Judge. Affirmed. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, Christopher S. Reeder, H. Mark Madnick, Andrew L. Howard for Defendants and Appellants. Horgan, Rosen, Beckham & Coren, Mel Aranoff for Plaintiff and Respondent. _______________

David Frank, Kaveh Golshan, and Behzad Soofer appeal from the judgment entered against them and in favor of respondent First Citizens Bank, after respondent's motion for summary judgment was granted. We affirm.

Facts In February 2007, respondent's predecessor in interest, First Regional Bank, loaned $7.28 million to an entity called Hancock Regency Partners, LLC. (Hereinafter, "the Loan.") The Loan was secured by a deed of trust encumbering real property which was improved with nine apartment buildings. Hancock Partners planned to demolish the buildings and build a new condo development. Golshan was the Managing Partner of Hancock Partners. Frank and Soofer were, apparently, also members of Hancock Partners. Golshan, Frank, and Soofer (hereinafter, "the Guarantors") guaranteed the Loan. The Loan was a bridge loan. It enabled Hancock Partners to buy the property, but did not provide funds for construction. At summary judgment, the Guarantors proffered evidence that when the loan was made, First Regional believed that it was likely that it would provide the construction loan, too. The Loan's initial maturity date was February 1, 2009. In 2008, after expending sums to evict tenants and obtain permissions from the City of Los Angeles, Hancock Partners decided that the condominium project was not feasible. It sought to convert the buildings back to apartments, and sought an 18 to 24 month extension of the Loan. From the outset, Hancock Partners seems to have worked with two First Regional Vice Presidents, Ralph Downing and Paul Comilang. In February 2009, Downing and Comilang submitted an application to First Regional's Senior Loan Committee, seeking a six month extension of the Loan. That extension was granted, but that was the only extension granted. After August 2009, Hancock Partners failed to make payments due on the Loan.

2

In January 2010, the FDIC became the receiver for First Regional. First Citizens Bank soon bought the Loan, along with other assets. In April 2010, First Citizens sold the property at a non-judicial foreclosure sale. The sale price was lower than the amount due on the Loan, and First Citizens filed this suit to recover the deficiency from the Guarantors. The trial court granted respondent's motion for summary judgment and entered judgment in respondent's favor in the amount of $3,710,665.18.

Standard of Review "A trial court properly grants a motion for summary judgment only if no issues of triable fact appear and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (Code Civ. Proc.,

Download B237283.PDF