Ileana Spizzirri v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank , 592 F. App'x 599 ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 05 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ILEANA SPIZZIRRI, No. 12-57028
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 8:12-cv-00311-JVS-RNB
v.
MEMORANDUM*
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NA; et al.,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 2, 2015**
Pasadena, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and D.W. NELSON and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Appellant Ileana Spizzirri appeals the district court’s dismissal of her
complaint for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court did not err in dismissing Spizzirri’s claim for negligence
because her complaint failed to plausibly allege that the defendants owed her a
duty of care. Despite the complaint’s allegations that the defendants generally
engaged in improper lending practices, Spizzirri failed to plead with sufficient
factual particularity that the defendants conducted the appraisal of her property
with the intent of inducing her to enter into a loan transaction, or that the
defendants otherwise acted outside their “conventional role as a lender of money”
in preparing the appraisal in this case. See Nymark v. Heart Fed. Sav. & Loan
Ass’n, 231 Cal. App. 3d 1089, 1099–1100 (1991).
The district court did not err in dismissing Spizzirri’s claims for
nondisclosure and fraudulent concealment. The defendants were not under any
legal duty to disclose the details of their underlying business activities while
appraising Spizzirri’s property and financing her mortgage, and therefore cannot be
liable for nondisclosure or fraudulent concealment. See Bank of Am. Corp. v.
Superior Court, 198 Cal. App. 4th 862, 872–73 (2011).
Because Spizzirri failed to state a claim for either negligence or fraudulent
concealment, the district court did not err in dismissing Spizzirri’s claim for unfair
competition under California law.
AFFIRMED.
2