Bob Norman focuses his practice on consumer finance and commercial litigation matters. Bob represents financial institutions, businesses, and other clients in a variety of cases. Bob has tried jury and non-jury lawsuits in federal, state, and bankruptcy courts. Although a trial lawyer at heart, Bob’s focus is to creatively resolve matters for his clients promptly and efficiently. Bob is always mindful of a client’s business model and structure while navigating the complexities of litigation. Bob specializes in financial services litigation, including matters involving:
• State and Federal consumer protection statutes;
• Bankruptcy issues;
• Title issues;
• Negligence claims;
• Fair Debt Collection Practices Act;
• Fair Credit Reporting Act;
• Truth in Lending Act (TILA);
• Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA); and
• Home Owners Equity Protection Act (HOEPA);
Bob also works with clients to train, counsel, and develop best practices as well as legal compliance. Bob received his Bachelor of Science degree in Finance, along with a Minor in Business Economics from the California State University, Long Beach in 2001. Bob received his law degree Cum Laude in 2004 from Whittier College, School of Law. In law school, Bob was a member of the Whittier Law Review and was the recipient of the CALI Excellence Award, Alternative Dispute Resolution.
• Prevailed in an Federal Court Jury Trial regarding a new law dealing with consumer protection issues. Bob and the Firm’s trial team overcame a hostile media, won over the jury, and later prevailed on appeal before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
• Prevailed in various jury and non-jury trials defending against wrongful foreclosure claims, consumer protection, and loan securitization issues.
• Prevailed in contested judicial foreclosure trials.
• Prevailed in trial dealing with state consumer protection laws, contested foreclosure, securitization, and standing claims.
• Prevailed in trial dealing with breach of contract and tort-based claims on behalf of financial institution.
• Defended large national loan servicers in civil actions brought by the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office alleging violations of the municipal code and California Business and Professions Code section 17200 arising out of maintenance and servicing of foreclosed properties.
• Prevailed in numerous demurrers, motions to dismiss, and summary judgment proceedings on behalf of financial institutions and business defendants.
• Prevailed in numerous appellate matters, including:
– Diessner v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 618 F.Supp.2d 1184 (2009) (“federal court granted summary judgment in favor of loan servicer refuting borrower’s” claims under the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act (HOEPA), Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), and predator lending claims); affirmed by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (384 Fed.Appx. 609 (9th Cir. 2010)
– Calvo v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 199 Cal.App.4th 118 (2011) (affirmed beneficiary lender’s demurrer without leave to amend where borrower sought to set aside a foreclosure sale for an alleged violation of a statute requiring the assignee of a deed of trust to record an assignment before exercising the power to sell real property)
– Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v. Slotke, 192 Wash.App. 166 (2016) (court of appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of assignee lender in heavily contested matter where borrower claimed the lender lacked standing based upon purported noncompliance with trust’s pooling and servicing agreement and status as a holder of the note).
– Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 62 Cal.4th 919 (Cal. 2016), California Supreme Court decision that substantially limited the standing of borrowers to sue for wrongful foreclosure.
– Demarest v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. as Tr. for registered holders of Nomura Home Equity Loan, Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-HE2, 920 F.3d 1223 (9th Cir. 2019) (holding deed of trust assignee, as trustee of traditional common law trust, who sued in its own name, was a real party in interest and therefore its citizenship controlled for diversity analysis purposes, rather than the citizenship of the trust’s beneficiaries)
• November 9, 2011 – California Court of Appeals Reinforces Civil Code 2932.5’s Inapplicability to Deeds of Trust and Upholds the Rule That Recordation of an Assignment of the Beneficial Interest Under a Deed of Trust is Not a Prerequisite to Foreclosure
• Arizona State Bar Association
• California and Mortgage Bankers Association
• California State Bar Association
• Los Angeles and Orange County Bar Associations
• New Mexico State Bar Association
• Washington State Bar Association