Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00095/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00095-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 450
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

 Plaintiff's second amended complaint named a number of additional defendants. At

the Rule 16 scheduling conference held on August 4, 2011, we dismissed all defendants other

than Chase Home Finance (doc. 21).

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Laurie F. Wright, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Chase Home Finance LLC, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV-11-00095-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it defendant's motion for summary judgment (doc. 32) and

separate statement of facts (doc. 33). Plaintiff has not responded and the time for responding

has expired. Under LRCiv 7.2(i), "such non-compliance may be deemed a consent to the

denial or granting of the motion and the Court may dispose of the motion summarily."

Moreover, our review of defendant's motion supports granting summary judgment.

This action arises from plaintiff's participation in the Home Affordable Mortgage Program

Trial Period Plan concerning a possible loan modification with defendant.1

 At this stage,

only plaintiff's claims for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair

dealing remain. Plaintiff alleges that defendant breached the trial period plan by failing to

credit her payments. However, defendant's statement of facts and supporting exhibits reveal

Case 2:11-cv-00095-FJM Document 36 Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

that defendant credited payments plaintiff made between October 2009 and July 2010 in

accordance with the terms of the trial period plan. Plaintiff has not made any mortgage

payments since July 2010. Thus, the undisputed facts reveal that defendants did not breach

the trial period plan with respect to the crediting of payments. Without a breach, plaintiff's

breach of contract claim necessarily fails. See Frank Lloyd Wright Found. v. Kroeter, 697

F. Supp. 2d 1118, 1125 (D. Ariz. 2010). And without a breach, plaintiff has no remaining

claim that she was denied the benefits of defendant's agreement to credit her payments under

the trial period plan. See Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz. 149, 153, 726 P.2d 565, 569

(1986) (essence of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is that parties will not act

to impair another's right to receive benefits promised under an agreement). Defendant is

entitled to judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff's remaining claims.

IT IS ORDERED GRANTING defendant's motion for summary judgment (doc. 32).

The Clerk shall enter judgment. 

DATED this 8th day of March, 2012.

Case 2:11-cv-00095-FJM Document 36 Filed 03/09/12 Page 2 of 2