Singh v. Bank of America CA4/3
Plaintiff Surat Singh defaulted on a $1.1 million loan and sued various institutions for fraud, conspiracy to defraud, and other causes of action. He now appeals from a judgment entered following the sustaining of demurrers without leave to amend to his sixth amended complaint for conspiracy to defraud.
Singh contends the trial court improperly (1) made factual determinations; (2) ruled his action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations; (3) improperly dismissed causes of action alleged in prior complaints; and (4) denied further leave to amend. We conclude no error occurred.
Comments on Singh v. Bank of America CA4/3