California Codes
Cal. Civil Code § 2932.5 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Where a power to sell real property is given to a mortgagee, or other encumbrancer, in an instrument intended to secure the payment of money, the power is part of the security and vests in any person who by assignment becomes entitled to payment of the money secured by the instrument. The power of sale may be exercised by the assignee if the assignment is duly acknowledged and recorded.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: In Re Salazar, 448 B.R. 814 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 2011).
In Re Salazar, 448 B.R. 814 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 2011). “Bank’s failure to record an assignment of its interest before foreclosures as required by California Civil Code section 2932.5. 3 US Bank responds *817 that Civil Code section 2932.”
Kalnoki v. First Am. Tr. Servicing Solutions, LLC, 8 Cal. App. 5th 23 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). “The second amended complaint alleged four fraud causes of action and causes of action for conspiracy, declaratory relief, unjust enrichment, and for violating Business and Professions Code section 17200, Civil Code section 2932.5, and the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices…”
Barrionuevo v. Chase Bank, N.A., 885 F. Supp. 2d 964 (N.D. Cal. 2012). “Related to the allegation that Chase did not acquire Plaintiffs’ DOT from Washington Mutual, the Barrionuevos further base them wrongful foreclosure claim on the grounds that the Defendants have failed to comply with California Civil Code § 2932.5, in that they have not…”
Rockridge Trust v. Wells Fargo, N.A., 985 F. Supp. 2d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2013). “5; (2) the First NOTS was issued too soon after the NOD was recorded in violation of California Civil Code § 2923.52; (3) the true beneficiary of Plaintiffs’ loan was unknown and the improper party initiated foreclosure in violation of California Civil Code § 2932.”
Champlaie v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 706 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (E.D. Cal. 2009). “Under Cal. Civ.Code § 2932.5, when the beneficial interest under the promissory note is assigned, the assignee may exercise a security interest in real property provided that the assignment is “duly acknowledged and recorded.”
San Francisco Apt. Ass'n v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 881 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2018). “Gov’t Code § 27280(a); Cal. Civ. Code § 2932.5 ; Cal. Bus. & Prof.”
Ghuman v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 989 F. Supp. 2d 994 (E.D. Cal. 2013). “5 Under the cause of action for wrongful foreclosure, Plaintiffs also allege that Defendants failed to comply with California Civil Code Section 2932.5. Section 2932.”
Macklin v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. (In re Macklin), 495 B.R. 8 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 2013). “Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant failed to comply with California Civil Code § 2932.5 2 because an Assignment of Deed of Trust, bearing an effective date of November 17, 2009, was recorded by Defendant November 30, 2009.”
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Salazar (In Re Salazar), 470 B.R. 557 (S.D. Cal. 2012). “Bank had to meet both requirements of California Civil Code § 2932.5 for the foreclosure to be valid.”
Cruz v. Aurora Loan Servs. LLC (In Re Cruz), 457 B.R. 806 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 2011). “2011), that California Civil Code § 2932.5 3 pertains to both mortgages and deeds of trust.”
Pedersen v. Greenpoint Mortg. Funding, Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (E.D. Cal. 2012). “This court has rejected claims attacking MERS’ ability to assign and substitute, and claims that a failure to record under California Civil Code section 2932.5 invalidates the sale; plaintiffs have presented nothing which persuades the court to reconsider its prior decisions at…”
Cosentino v. Coastal Constr. Co., 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9646 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994). “) Seller contends that compliance with section 9391 would be a meaningless act because the underlying obligation is a nonrecourse purchase money note.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.