Background
Mohandas Shaji and Lekha Shaji, proceeding pro se, appealed a district court judgment dismissing their action arising from the foreclosure of their property. The district court had dismissed multiple claims including wrongful foreclosure, negligence, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of the California Business and Professions Code.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the dismissal de novo and concluded the district court properly dismissed each claim. The court found the Shajis failed to allege facts sufficient to show Wells Fargo caused an illegal, fraudulent, or willfully oppressive sale. The court held there was no duty of care owed by the lender regarding loan modification applications or the eviction process. The court further found the plaintiffs failed to allege facts showing a breach of contract, unjust retention of benefits, unlawful business practices, or conduct extreme enough to support claims for intentional or negligent infliction of emotional distress.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that pro se litigants must allege specific facts to survive a motion to dismiss in foreclosure cases, particularly regarding the lender’s duty of care and the elements of wrongful foreclosure under California law.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download