Full opinion text
HALL, District Judge. 1. Findings of Fact, 2. Conclusions of Law, and 3. Judgment Quieting Titles on Motions for Summary Judgment by Home Investment Company, Title Service Company, and Long Beach Federal Savings, and Loan Association on Behalf of Themselves and Others [Sometimes Referred to as 8,000 Homeowners] Concerning Various Parcels and Items of Real and Personal Property. Judgment Docketed and Entered Sept. 16, 1954 Edmund L. Smith, Clerk By C. A. Simmons Deputy Clerk Filed Sept. 16, 1954 Edmund L. Smith, Clerk By S. W. Stacey Deputy Clerk [ 1 ] District Court of the United States, Southern District of California, Central Division. Civil Action No. 13979-P.H. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, a corporation. Plaintiff, vs. Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, a corporation, Defendant. Home Investment Company of Long Beach, as representative of a Class of 8,-000 Homeowners; and Title Service Company as Trustee on deeds of trust on homes of 8,000 Homeowners, et al., Cross-claimants, vs. Federal Home Loan Bank San Francisco; A. V. Ammann, Conservator; Home Loan Bank Board; Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation, et al., Cross-defendants. Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, et al., Cross-claimants, vs. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco ; A. V. Ammann; Home Loan Bank Board, et al., Cross-defendants. 1. Findings of Fact, 2. Conclusions of Law, and 3. Judgment Quieting Titles on Motions for Summary Judgment by Home Investment Company, Title Service Company, and Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association on Btnalf of Themselves and Others [Sometimes Referred to as 8,-000 Homeowners] Concerning Various Parcels and Items of Real and Personal Property. [ 2 ] The Motions for Summary Judgment quieting titles of: 1. Home Investment Company, for itself and as representative of a class; 2. Plaintiff in intervention and cross-defendant Title Service Company, on behalf of itself as trustee and as representative of a class; and 3. Defendant and cross-claimant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, on behalf of itself, and as representative of a class; all came on regularly to be heard before this Court, and were heard on the following dates, to wit: May 21, 25, 1953, June 8, 22, 24, 1953, August 3, 1953, October 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 1953, December 21, 22, 1953, and January 11, 14, 21, 22, 27, 28, 1954. Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco is sometimes hereinafter referred to and called San Francisco Bank. Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association is sometimes hereinafter referred to and called Long Beach Association or the association, Title Service Company is hereinafter referred to as Title Service or as trustee. The signers of the notes and trust deeds involved are sometimes hereinafter referred to as trustors, obligors, borrowers or homeowners. That A. V. Ammann went into possession of the assets and properties of the Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association on May 20th, 1946 under Order No. 5254 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration, and continued in the possession and operation of said association and its business and affairs until January 24th, 1948, during which time George K. Bramley was and acted as his deputy. That such possession and operation of said association by Ammann and/or said Bramley arose out of and they acted under Federal Home Loan Bank Administration Order No. 5254, and that hereinafter for convenience reference to said Ammann and to said Bramley includes such capacity or purported capacity, and by [3] period of operation or possession whether specifically mentioned or not is meant the period from May 20, 1946 to January 24, 1948. It would unduly prolong this judgment to recite the details shown in the clerk’s minutes, reporter’s transcripts, and files of this Court, concerning appearances of numerous counsel, service of notice of said motions, etc. Said motions were argued by all counsel desiring so to do and having argued, counsel submitted the matter, and the Court having considered the evidence, both oral and documentary, and from the verified motions, affidavits and evidence (both oral and documentary) presented, both in this Action No. 13979-P.H. and from all matters produced at said hearings and from the records, orders, judgments, pleadings, and proceedings heretofore had in this action, and in the above referred to consolidated, related and enjoined causes, the matters were submitted and considered by the Court, and on June 10, 1954, a memorandum opinion and direction for orders, etc., 122 F.Supp. 401, was filed by the Court in this action. The Court therefrom and from said previous hearings, findings, orders, and judgments, now finds: 1. Reasonable Notice Given. That due and adequate and lawful process and notice of the time set for hearing of said Motions for Summary Judgment was and has been given, and lawful and timely service of the supporting papers therefor was given, and that said notice and service and the time given thereby was, and is, reasonable. 2. Proposed Drafts of Summary Judgment Served Upon Counsel. That counsel for the parties in whose favor judgment is herein entered pursuant to said Memorandum Opinion and direction for orders, etc., filed, and caused to be served upon counsel for parties against whom judgment is herein entered, their first [4] proposed form of this Summary Judgment. That objections were filed thereto and the Court, on July 22nd and 23rd, 1954, upon notice to counsel, held hearings upon the proposed form of this Summary Judgment, and directed counsel for prevailing parties thereon to redraft another proposed form of Summary Judgment embodying the findings, conclusions of law, and judgment, as then directed by this Court. Said second draft of proposed Summary Judgment and the affidavit of Gran-ville B. Smith hereinafter referred to was thereafter similarly filed and served upon counsel for said parties, and written objections thereto received, which have been duly considered. 3. Summary of Detailed Descriptions Contained in Attached Schedule and Breakdown of “Paid” and “Unpaid” Notes and Trust Deeds. That attached to said motions and to various pleadings herein was a list or schedule of the several thousand notes, trust deeds and properties involved; that in the interest of accuracy and to comply with the said Memorandum of Opinion for Summary Judgment, it was and is necessary that an analysis of said schedules and descriptions be made; that the same was done as appears from the Affidavits of Granville B. Smith filed and served herein as above mentioned; that no affidavit or other showing of any nature contrary to the facts stated in said Affidavit has been made or filed, and that the same is true; that it appears therefrom and otherwise herein: (a) —That the schedule attached hereto consisting of pages 1 to 121, inclusive, is hereby made a part hereof as if herein again set out haec verba,. (b) —That said schedule contains a complete list and description of all of the notes and trust deeds involved in and covered by the Affidavit and Motions for Summary Judgment [5] and the within Judgment, giving the descriptions by loan number (as carried by Long Beach Association, Ammann as aforesaid, and by Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco), original amount of loan, original date of execution of note and trust deed, name of trust or (debtor, homeowner, borrower or obligor), name of trustee, whether paid or unpaid on January 18, 1954, whether designated in or by any instruments of assignment or not (executed by said Ammann to Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco), and recording data from which the legal description of the real property can be ascertained. (c) —That there is contained in said schedule an itemization and description of 4,236 notes and 3,944 trust deeds, covering as many, or more, separate parcels of property securing the same (the number of trust deeds differs from the number of notes for the reason that in many instances one trust deed secured several notes). That of the said 4,236 notes and their accompanying trust deeds, there was in the possession of San Francisco Bank on March 13th, 1948, 2,400 notes and their accompanying trust deeds under claim of assignment to it by said Ammann as conservator, as collateral security on notes signed by said Ammann, which had a face on March 13th, 1948 of $6,300,000. (d) —That 1,068 of said 4,236 notes are not designated in any instrument, or thereon, as having been assigned, and are either notes and their accompanying trust deeds intervened in court or received by A. Y. Ammann as the result of loans made by him while in possession and operation of said association, acting under Federal Home Loan Bank Administration Order No. 5254 between the period of May 20th, 1946 and January 24th, 1948. (e) —That the grand total of original amounts of all notes listed in said schedule was the sum of $16,967,606.46. (f) —That from May 20, 1946 (or date of instruments of assignment if any subsequent thereto, and prior to [6] March 26, 1948) to and until January 18, 1954, a grand total of $13,493,185.32 was paid by the trustors-obligors on said notes and trust deeds, or on their behalf, and was received and/or collected by either said Ammann while in possession, as aforesaid of Long Beach Association, or said association after restoration of possession to it on January 24, 1948, on the 4,236 notes and trust deeds listed in said schedule, either in full or partially as identified in said schedule as “paid” or “unpaid” respectively. (g) —That of the 4,236 notes secured by trust deeds listed in said schedule, 3,043 were paid in full by or on behalf of the respective obligor-trustors (homeowners) prior to January 18, 1954, and are identified on said schedule as “paid”. (h) —-That of said 4,236 notes secured by trust deeds listed in said schedule, 1,193 of said notes and their accompanying trust deeds had unpaid balances due thereon as of January 18, 1954, and are identified in said schedule as “unpaid”. (i) —That prior to January 18th, 1954, the trustor-debtors (homeowners) on said 3,043 notes and trust deeds, identified in said schedule as “paid”, paid in full and discharged, or caused to be paid and discharged, all obligations of every kind and character which existed against them on said notes and trust deeds by paying sums which totaled $8,541,960.93 principal, and $1,753,663.15 interest on said notes and trust deeds, either to Long Beach Association or to Ammann while in possession or operation of said association from May 20th, 1946 to January 24th, 1948, or by deposit in court by interpleader-intervention in Action 5421-5678. (j) —That prior to January 18, 1954, the trustor-debtors on said 1,193 notes and trust deeds, identified in said schedule as “unpaid” had paid the sum of $1,716,433.07 on account of principal, and $1,481,128.17 on account of interest on [7] said 1,193 notes and their accompanying trust deeds either to Long Beach Association or to said Ammann while in possession or operation of said association. (k) —That the Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association prior to January 18, 1954, has received the sum of $13,493,185.32 principal and interest on said 4,236 notes and their accompanying trust deeds, which sum is made up of the total principal and interest described in subparagraph (i) above, as paid on the 3,043 notes and their accompanying trust deeds paid in full prior to January 18, 1954, and the total principal and interest described in subparagraph (j) above, as paid on account of the 1,-193 notes and their accompanying trust deeds which were not paid in full prior to January 18, 1954, of which total sum, the sum of $1,641,037.96 (principal and interest) was deposited in court in the interpleader-interventions in Action 5421-5678, hereinafter described; and that said sum of $1,641,037.96 so deposited in court is specifically exempted from the within quiet title judgment. (l) —That in said schedule of 4,236 notes and their accompanying trust deeds, there is listed the notes and their accompanying trust deeds which were the subject of interpleader-interventions and judgments thereon, hereinafter more particularly described in heading No. 17 hereof, in the course of which inter-pleader-intervention proceedings had in Action Nos. 5421-5678, there was deposited in court the total sum of $1,641,-037.96 which was payment in full of all obligations, duties and liabilities of the trustor debtor on said notes and trust deeds; that all of the properties, all of the notes and accompanying trust deeds, covered by said interpleader-interventions are described as being among the $3,043 notes and trust deeds identified in said schedule as “paid”. [ 8] 4. Organization of Defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. That defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association is a mutual thrift Federal Savings and Loan Association, organized and existing as such under the laws of the United States, with its principal and only place of business at Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California, within the district and territory of this District Court. Said association presently has approximately 30,000, mutual shareholders, who are savings depositors therein who are mutual members thereof, and in excess of 8,000 borrowers. 5. Organization of Federal Home Loan Bank of Los Angeles. That cross-defendant Federal Home Loan Bank of Los Angeles was the Federal Home Loan Bank for the Twelfth Federal Home Loan Bank District, and was organized and created as such on October 20, 1932. Said bank existed under and pursuant to the laws of the United States. Defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association was a stockholder in and a member of said bank. 6. Merger of Federal Home Loan Banks. Creation of Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco. On March 29, 1946, by Federal Home Loan Bank Administration Orders Nos. 5082, 5083 and 5084, all of the assets and liabilities of said Los Angeles Bank, and all of its properties and obligations, were transferred to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Portland, the Federal Home Loan Bank for the Eleventh District. Said Federal Home Loan Bank of Portland was organized and created as such on November 23, 1932. Its principal and.only place of business was Portland, Oregon. It existed under, and pursuant to, the laws of the United States. By said Orders Nos. 5082, 5083 and 5084, the name of [9] the said Portland Bank was changed to Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, and the principal office of said bank transferred from Portland, Oregon, to San Francisco, California, with branches of said San Francisco Bank thereafter, and yet, maintained and operated at Portland, Oregon, and Los Angeles, California. By the terms of said Orders Nos. 5082, 5083 and 5084, all of the properties and assets, and all of the liabilities and obligations of the said Federal Home Loan Bank of Los Angeles were transferred to, and assumed by, Federal Home Loan Bank of Portland, now known as the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, and sometimes herein referred to as San Francisco Bank. 7. Creation of Defendant Home Investment Company. On March 21, 1939, cross-defendant Home Investment Company of Long Beach was organized. Ever since such date it was, and now is, a corporation organized and existing as such under the laws of the State of California. Since its organization, it has, and yet does, engage in a general home building, real estate subdivision, and home selling business. It did and does finance construction of said homes by individual notes and deeds of trust from lending institutions, including defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, by construction or building loans, and during or upon the completion of construction, did or does sell the completed homes to individual homeowner purchasers who, by various sales documents, including contracts for the sale of real estate, grant deeds, and other similar conveyance arrangements, did or do become the owners of, and enter into-immediate possession and occupancy of,, said completed homes. By the terms of said conveyance instruments, said individual homeowners-did and do assume and become personally liable for the payments of said notes and deeds of trust upon their respective' homes. Most, or all, of said individual notes and deeds of trust, by the terms thereof, did or do require [10] periodic-monthly or other installment payments of interest and principal thereon. Such payments were or are made by each respective homeowner, either to cross-defendant Home Investment Company or directly to defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, as holder, payee, and owner, of the note and owner and beneficiary of and under the deed of trust upon such individual homeowners’ homes. On May 20, 1946, Home Investment Company was the trustor on 174 separate trust deeds, security for 174 loans described (among other loans) on pages 82 to 88 inc. of the schedule, a part hereof. 8. Creation of Defendant Title Service Company. Cross-defendant Title Service Company is a California corporation, organized as such by filing of its Articles of Incorporation on June 11th, 1935, and at all times since that date it has been, and yet is, a corporation organized and existing as such under the laws of the State of California. It did and does act as, among other things, trustee on deeds of trust for various lenders, including defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. It is, and/or was, the trustee upon all of the deeds of trust securing all the 4,236 notes listed on said schedule. 9. Nature of Business of Defendant Long Beach Federal. Defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association is a mutual thrift association, organized and existing under applicable Acts of Congress relating thereto. It has presently approximately 30,000 shareholder-depositors who or which share proportionately in its profits or losses. The payments they receive upon their deposited savings are dividends. Its principal source of income is from loans on real property, largely made to individuals on homes or dwellings under applicable Federal statutes. Said association did and does lend its accumulated [11] savings deposits upon notes secured by encumbrances upon real property. By custom and usage in Southern California, said loans instead of being secured by mortgages, are evidenced by notes secured by, and part of, deeds of trust by which the legal title to the home of the individual borrower is conveyed to a trustee (in this case, cross-defendant Title Service Company, as trustee), to be held by said trustee as security for the repayment of the loans thus made. Said borrower is known as the trustor in such transactions, the lender is the beneficiary, and the holder of the legal title is trustee. Upon repayment of said loans in full, written requests for reconveyance of said trust deeds were and are made by .said cross-defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, as payee on said notes, and beneficiary under said deeds of trust. Such written requests for re-conveyance were and are directed to cross-defendant Title Service Company as trustee. Upon said trustee being satisfied as to the genuineness and authority of said requests for reconveyance, said trustee did and does issue its reconveyance deed which, when recorded, is effective to re-convey to said homeowner also known as the borrower and trustor, the legal title to his respective home, and to release and discharge of record the obligation of said deed of trust and the note secured thereby. Defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association is, and/or. was, payee on each of the notes and beneficiary on each of the deeds of trust listed on said schedule hereof, (either .as original payee and beneficiary, or as successor of such original payee and bener ficiary). Each of such notes and deeds of trust shown on said schedule, under date of recordation as being recorded on or pri- or to May 20, 1946, were in existence on said May 20, 1946, were in the premises of said association, and were seized by [12] cross-defendant Ammann when he took possession of said association on that date. Each of said deeds of trust contain terms (varying slightly in the printed form thereof), providing in substance that the trustee and the beneficiary are authorized to intervene, or otherwise become parties, in any legal proceeding or court action affecting the title concerning the security of said real property, the subject of said notes and deeds of trust. 10. Seizure of Long Beach Federal and Its Notes and Deeds of Trust by Defendant Ammann. That on May 20, 1946, cross-defendant Ammann upon an assertion of right and power so to do under Order No. 5254 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration, and claiming he had been appointed conservator of said Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, did seize possession of said Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, all of its assets, premises and business, claimed to aggregate approximately $26,000,000 and thereafter continued in the possession and operation of said association, its affairs and business until 12:00 o’clock noon January 24, 1948. As part of said seizure, he obtained possession of all of the original notes and deeds of trust described on said schedule, except such as are described under recording data as recorded subsequent to May 20, 1946. That each of said original notes name defendant [13] Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association as payee; each of said original deeds of trust name said association as beneficiary (either as original payee and beneficiary, or as successor to said original payee and beneficiary). 11. Ammann Ousted by Three-Judge Court. That said Ammann remained in possession of said association until October 1st, 1946, when, pursuant to an order and judgment of the statutory three-judge court in Action No. 5421-P.H. before this Court, he commenced to surrender possession of said association to said association’s officers. Such transfer of possession was never completed. 12. Stay by U. S. Supreme Court. Upon appeal to the United States Supreme Court, a stay of said three-judge court judgment resulted in said Ammann retaining possession of said association from October 2, 1946, and thereafter remaining in possession until 12:00 o’clock noon, Saturday, January 24, 1948. 13. Removal of Ammann by Administrative and Court Orders. That by Order No. 388 (dated January 17, 1948) cross-defendants Home Loan Bank Board rescinded Order No. 5254 of the Federal Home Loan Administration and said Ammann was required to return possession of said association’s assets, premises and business to the officers of said association, and to render an accounting for said seized assets and all transactions therewith. That upon presentation of said Home Loan Bank Board Order No. 388 to this Court, as was required by the terms of said order, an order and judgment of this Court was entered on January 23, 1948, among other things removing cross-defendant Ammann from the capacity in which he had possession of said association, requiring him to account, and revesting title to all of said association’s assets, [14] including all the notes and trust deeds listed on said schedule, in said association and its officers. Said order and judgment of this Court directed the said Ammann to, and pursuant thereto he did surrender possession of said association and its assets, premises and business, as of noon, January 24, 1948. Said order and judgment was a final judgment and no appeal therefrom was ever taken. 14. Creation of Claimed $7,000,000 Debt. In 1946, shortly after said seizure of possession of the assets, premises and business of said association, cross-defendant Ammann claims to have borrowed, and plaintiff San Francisco Bank claims to have loaned, sums aggregating $7,300,000. In connection therewith said cross-defendant Ammann executed and delivered to said plaintiff bank several promissory notes, aggregating in face $7,300,000. Approximately $1,000,000 of said amount was subsequently repaid by said Ammann. The four purported notes of the face of $6,300,000, Exhibits “A,” “B,” “C” and “D” of plaintiff’s complaint herein, were executed by said Ammann acting under Federal Home Loan Bank Administration Order No. 5254, in connection with said transactions. Among the contentions of defendant Long Beach Association are that no loan was made, nor consideration given or created, and that such notes are renewal notes, and that Ammann had no lawful authority to make said loans, execute said notes or accompanying documents, or assign or pledge or transfer any property of said association as security whether Ammann was lawfully appointed and acting as conservator or not. It is unnecessary to now decide these contentions in order to enter the summary judgment quieting title herein contained, as the same are not material to the within judgment. [ 15] 15. Assignment of Homeowners’ Notes and Trust Deeds as Security for Said $7,000,000 and Documents Executed Thereunder. In connection with said last above mentioned transactions and as alleged security or collateral therefor, cross-defendant Ammann executed a series of documents hereinafter referred to, by which it is claimed by Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco that there was assigned and transferred to it all of the notes and trust deeds set forth in said schedule whether designated on said schedule as “assigned” or not, and there was physically delivered to it on several separate occasions 3,168 of the notes and accompanying trust deeds described in said schedule, aggregating $9,584,084.00 in unpaid balances due thereon at the date of the said respective claimed assignments. Each of said original notes named defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association as either original or successor payee. Each of said original deeds of trust named said defendant Savings Association as either original or successor beneficiary. In addition, cross-defendant Ammann acting under Federal Home Loan Bank Administration Order No. 5254 purportedly pledged and transferred as security on said notes attached to plaintiff’s complaint herein to plaintiff bank, said U. S. Government bonds owned by defendant Savings Association with an approximate face of $8,300,000 and their attached interest coupons. Subsequent transactions between said Ammann and said plaintiff bank resulted in sale of certain of such bonds, and purchase of other new bonds, which are claimed by plaintiff to have been similarly pledged and transferred to said plaintiff bank. $5,300,000 face of such bearer U. S. bonds (original or substituted) remained in the possession of said plaintiff bank on March 13th, 1948, together with 2,-400 of the said 3,168 notes and trust deeds securing the same which were at one time in the [16] possession of San Francisco Bank as hereinbefore set forth. As part of said alleged borrowing transactions, various instruments and documents were executed by said Ammann while in possession and operation of said Association as aforesaid. Among such are: (a) The original notes listed and described on said schedule and identified thereon as “assigned,” were endorsed without date as follows: “Pay to the Order of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association By A. V. Ammann Conservator” (b) A “Subordination Agreement”; (c) A “Collection Agreement”; (d) A “Pledge Agreement”; (e) An “Assignment of mortgages or deeds of trust.” Said assignment of mortgages or deeds of trust contained 40 pages of lists describing several thousand trust deeds with date, trustor and trustee, and recording information. (f) At least 12 similar documents describing various of the said 3,168 notes and deeds of trust, identified on said schedule as “assigned” bearing dates of June 1, 1946, June 21, 1946, December 23, 1947, and January 6, 1948. The text in full (omitting said 40 pages of list of notes and trust deeds) of each of (b) (c), (d), (e) and (f), will be found on pages 7 to 11 inc., of the Opinion of this Court of June 10th, 1954, 122 F.Supp. 401, in the above action. Reference is made to said opinion for the contents and particulars of said documents. That in addition to said Collection Agreement “(c)” above mentioned, a Collection Agreement, similar in form, was previously executed by defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and [17] Loan Association through its duly elected officers and directors and Federal Home Loan Bank of Los Angeles through its duly elected officers and directors. Said Collection Agreement was so executed on October 23, 1934. That said prior Collection Agreement at all times remained in full force and effect, and has never been revoked or modified in any form by either of the parties to it or their successors. Such Collection Agreement was one of those “assets and/or liabilities” assumed by the Federal Home Loan Bank of Portland when it received said document and all other assets, and assumed said, and all other, liabilities of said Los Angeles Bank on March 29, 1946. That said asset and/or liability became, and remains an obligation in favor of and/or against plaintiff herein, Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco. 16. Homeowners’ Titles Clouded. Customs Re Title Insurance. That from May 20, 1946 until March 26, 1948, the titles to the real property of each of the borrower-trustors under each of the 4,236 notes and their accompanying deeds of trust described in said schedule were clouded, impaired and rendered unmarketable and unmerchantable by said seizures, assignments and transfers of said notes and deeds of trust by said cross-defendant Ammann and the claims of the numerous parties to Actions 5421-5678 of this Court, except as hereinafter set forth. That by usage and custom in Southern California, policies of title insurance are required for marketable and/or merchantable title to real property to be sold, encumbered or conveyed in said area, and if a property owner is unable to obtain policies of title insurance on his home or real property, he is thereby prevented from future sale of the same, or of obtaining [18] future loans or refinancing thereon. That during said period reputable title insurance companies were unwilling to insure the marketability or merchantability of said titles thus clouded by seizure, assignment and transfer of said notes and deeds of trust, and the disputes and issues of the litigation concerning the same, in connection with both the seizure of said Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, and said Federal Home Loan Bank of Los Angeles, and the intertransfer and commingling of the seized assets of such institutions, except upon deposit into the registry of this court of the total amount, plus accrued interest claimed to be due on the notes, deeds of trust, and similar negotiable securities at issue in said litigation, and requests for reconveyance issued by both Ammann acting as aforesaid under said Order No. 5254 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Administration and Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. That gr.ave and irreparable damage was threatened in 1946-1948, is now again threatened by the claims of San Francisco Bank in the within action, and will be suffered by said trustors (homeowners-borrowers) through being unable to clear the titles to their said real property of the obligations of said notes and deeds of trust and by said Title Service Company and Long Beach Association, because of the conflicting claims of the San Francisco Bank in its complaint, unless this Court, in the exercise of its equity jurisdiction grants judgment for quieting title as hereinafter provided. 17. Homeowner Interpleaders to Clear Titles. That from the 27th day of June, 1946, to January 24, 1948, there were 50 petitions to intervene in Actions Nos. 5421-5678, filed by various petitioners seeking to clear the titles to their homes and real property. Such petitions for intervention affected 480 separate parcels of real property within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. Pursuant to orders of this Court, there was deposited in Actions 5421-5678 in [19] the registry of this court, the aggregate sum of $1,641,037.96 in cash in inter-pleader by said trustor-borrowers hereinafter named in this heading No. 17. Upon each of such deposits, and upon receiving requests for reconveyance from Ammann and Long Beach Association, judgments for reconveyance of title to the respective petitioners in intervention and interpleader were made directing the execution by the trustee of re-conveyances and the delivery thereof to the trustors for said 480 separate parcels of real property. Thereby the true owners of said parcels of real property acquired merchantable titles, duly insurable by title insurance companies authorized by the Insurance Department of the State of California to issue title insurance on real property within the State of California without further involvement in the litigation then pending between many other parties. That in lieu of the obligations of the deeds of trust upon such separate parcels of real property, by said several judgments and orders, there remained on deposit in the registry of this court, said funds of $1,-641,037.96, subject to the claims of the various parties. That the names of such intervenors and interpleaders, and other data are listed and described and included in said schedule among those identified as “paid”, and the number of separate parcels of real property involved, the dates of filing of their complaints in intervention, the dates of the orders granting the relief sought, the amounts of money deposited in the registry of the court, and the date of such deposit, are separately described as follows: Name No. of Date of Date Parcels First Order Involved Filing Granted Total Amount of Date of Deposit Deposit Home Investment Co. 174 7- 1-46 7-13-46 $ 776,832.24 7-20-46 Michael J. O’Rourke Dorothy V. & 1 9-26-46 10- 7-46 3,492.59 10- 8-46 Theodore D. King 1 10-24-46 11-18-46 2,761.70 11-29-46 Eric & Ida C. Flodine 1 10-29-46 11-21-46 2.538.16 4-22-47 210.00 1-27-47 Katherine A. Ball 1 11-13-46 11-18-46 2,416.64 1-15-47 Flavy R. Miller 1 11-13-46 11-18-46 3,423.21 12-23-46 Carl C. Sleek 1 1- 7-47 1-20-47 2,589.04 2- 8-47 210.00 2- 4-47 Dorothy Pace 1 1- 8-47 1-20-47 1,549.25 2- 8-47 108.00 2- 4-47 Eric & Ida C. Flodine 1-16-47 2- 3-47 (Withdrawn) Sequoia Investment Co. 1 1-22-47 1-22-47 717.52 1-22-47 Irwin W. Moore 1 1-31-47 3-10-47 7,191.84 4- 9-47 Lloyd O. Leedom 6 1-31-47 3-10-47 26,534.07 4- 4-47 1.827.17 3-28-47 1,111.46 2-17-47 Name No. of Parcels Involved Date of First Filing Date Order Granted Total Amount of Deposit Date of Deposit Mary McGarvey & F. K. Metzenthin 1 2- 4-47 2-10-47 292.30 2-13-47 Eric & Ida C. Flodine 4 2-28-47 3-31-47 33.85 8- 8-47 10.00 4-23-47 12,153.53 4- 9-47 Ellis E. & Naomi B. Cook 1 3- 6-47 3-31-47 1,579.15 5-15-47 R. G. Trigg 76 4- 9-47 5-26-47 127,798.80 8-12-47 8.800.00 6- 9-47 C. J. & Marion E. Jones 6 4- 9-47 5-26-47 9.972.01 7-15-47 291.90 6- 9-47 C. J. & Marion E. Jones 1 4- 9-47 5-26-47 51,785.67 8-12-47 (Blanket) 6,250.00 6- 9-47 C. S. Jones 97 4- 9-47 5-26-47 137,361.08 8-12-47 11,800.00 6- 9-47 Alva H. & Helen K. Remington 1 4-11-47 6- 2-47 1,724.29 6-26-47 59.70 6- 9-47 Virgil E. & Willie Ward 1 4-14-47 6- 2-47 1,099.84 ' 6-30-47 18.00 6-18-47 379.43 6-12-47 R. C. & Marguerite C. Johnson 3 4-18-47 6- 2-47 5,106.43 9-30-47 865.00 6- 9-47 Vernon V. & Gladys T. Van Meter 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 2,219.82* 6- 4-47 88.15 6- 4-47 Arthur LaRue & Ethel M. Sherman 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 3,412.07 6-17-47 Raymond LaMarr 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 4,092.09 6-17-47 296.40 6- 4-47 115.52 6- 4-47 Wm. A. & Fay O. Branum 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 3,038.20 6-24-47 270.00 6- 4-47 Ira & Alberta Beasley 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 543.39 5-29-47 156.00 5-28-47 Robert P. & Helen S. Collins 1 5- 5-47 5-26-47 2,067.49 6-24-47 295.00 6- 4-47 Sunset Service Co. & D. L. Severn 4 5-23-47 6- 9-47 14,979.99 8- 4-47 D. L. Severn and Bessie M. Severn 2 5-23-47 6- 9-47 2,929.75 8- 4-47 50.00 7- 1-47 Robert L. & Grace E. Slaughter 1 5-23-47 6- 9-47 2,074.67 8- 1-47 193.53 7- 1-47 W. B. & Edna L. Blumer 1 5-23-47 6- 9-47 2.50 7- 2-47 2,299.89 7- 1-47 6- 4-47 6-16-47 1,783.57 8- 7-47 Irvy J. & Vera M. Schloe 1 300.00 7- 1-47 7- 1-47 Name No. of Date of Date Total Parcels First Order Amount of Date of Involved Filing Granted Deposit Deposit Wm. H. & Frances L. Wagoner 6- 5-47 6-16-47 3,296.18 9- 5-47 Harold C. and Blanche Englestad 6- 5-47 6-16-47 4,328.21 8- 13-47 332.54 7- 1-47 John M. & Arba F. Schoonover 6- 5-47 6-16-47 2,019.86 7-31-47 240.00 7- 1-47 James & Audie Gregory 6-16-47 6- 16-47 1,194.41 7- 8-47 219.00 7- 1-47 Sydney G. & L. S. Rose 6-17-47 (Withdrawn) Owen D. and Ruby M. Fields 6-23-47 11- 3-47 2.50 1- 6-47 3,510.34 12-17-47 Marguerite C. Johnson 6-25-47 7- 7-47 1,699.38 12-15-47 10,572.00 9-30-47 W. H. & Anna Mace 6-26-47 11- 3-47 7.50 12-20-47 13,519.12 12-15-47 J. B. Harrell 6-26-47 11- 3-47 1,195.69 1-22-48 252.00 12-15-47 Nathan D. & Grace M. Ricks 6-26-47 11- 3-47 2,053.81 1- 9-48 279.83 12-15-47 Lawrence R. & Donna D. Jones 8-15-47 11- 3-47 1.986.53 1-22-48 325.00 12-15-47 Ralph W. & Helen Thomas 8-15-47 11- 3-47 3.363.53 1-12-48 Glen E. & Theresa Emerson 8- 29-47 11- 3-47 (Withdrawn) Clayton T. & Melba B. Hobba 9- 22-47 11- 3-47 3,225.12 1-29-48 476.32 12-17-47 Ethel A. Cameron 10- 10-47 11- 3-47 6,843.46 1- 5-48 534.71 12-15-47 Wrigley Heights, Inc. 10-28-47 11- 3-47 60,956.23 1- 9-48 156.52 1- 9-48 22,934.90 12-22-47 Wrigley Heights, Second Inc. 65 10-28-47 11- 3-47 187,862.47 1- 9-48 53,181.94 12-22-47 Helen M. Wolfe 1 10-28-47 10-28-47 2,007.50 10-28-47 480 $1,641,037.96 [ 22] That each and all of such interventions was an interpleader into the registry of this court by one or more trustor-borrowers from said association, of money, the balance owing on the notes and deeds of trust upon the homes or real properties of said borrowers, which said notes and deeds of trust were owned by said Long Beach Association, and had come into the possession of defendant Ammann when he seized said association. Some or all of said notes and deeds of trust had been assigned by said defendant Ammann to said San Francisco Bank. 18. Possession by Plaintiff San Francisco Bank on March 13, 1948 of U. S. Government Bonds and Their Attached Coupons, and Notes and Trust Deeds. That on March 13, 1948, plaintiff San Francisco Bank had in its possession $5,300,000 par value of U. S. Government bonds, maturity date, serial number, interest rate, and interest coupon attached, as follows: [ 23] Int. Serial DenominaDescription Maturity Rate Numbers ' tiou. Amount U. S. Treas. 12-15/02-59 2% 1912, 1913, 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932, 1933, 1934, 1935, 2077, 2078, $100,000 $2,600,000 84380, 84345, 10,000 20,000 U. S. Treas. 6-15/72-67 2% 74797, 20476, 20477, 20478, 20479, 10,000 50,000 7564, 10391, 27972, 27973, 30175, 30176, 26634, 22235, 7559, 8462, 16015, 16016, 100,000 1,200,000 U. S. Treas. 12-15/72-67 2% 18485, 18486, 60859, 60860', 62487, 10,000 50.000 50757 100,000 100,000 U. S. Treas. 12-15/72-07 2y2 208876, 208877, 208878, 208879, 208880, 10,000 50.000 52982, 52983, 52984, 52985, 52986, 52987, 52988, 100.000 700,000 U. S. Treas. 12-15/72-67 2% 88404, 177089, 177090 10,000 30,000 53218, 53219, 53220, 53221, 53222 100.000 500,000 $5,300,000 [ 24] All interest coupons, June 15, 1948 and subsequent, attached. Said $5,300,000 in par value of U. S. Government bearer bonds were, and are, either bonds originally owned by said defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, prior to the said seizure of said association by said Ammann on May 20, 1946, or the proceeds of bonds so owned resulting from sale, exchange, or transfer thereof by cross-defendant Ammann and/or plaintiff San Francisco Bank. Said original bonds of said Association came into the possession of plaintiff San Francisco Bank on or about March 29, 1946, when said San Francisco Bank seized physical possession of all of the assets, premises, property and business, of said Los Angeles Bank. Said plaintiff San Francisco Bank, on March 13th, 1948, also had in its possession all of the original notes and deeds of trust listed and described on schedule pages 1 to 66 inc. hereof. Said plaintiff Bank had also in its possession, and previous to January 24,1948 had returned to cross-defendant Ammann, while in possession and operation of said Association as aforesaid, the original notes and deeds of trust identified on schedule pages 67 to 121 hereof as “assigned.” 19. Making of U. S. Court Order of March 13, 1948, Requiring Deposit Into Court of U. S. Bonds, Notes and Trust Deeds. That on March 13, 1948, in actions Nos. 5421-5678, this Court made its “Order Requiring Deposit of Certain Notes, Deeds of Trust, U. S. Government Bonds and Other Collateral Held By the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco.” That said order, by its terms, required said plaintiff Bank to deliver to the Clerk, and deposit in the registry of this Court, said original notes and deeds of trust, and said U. S. Government bonds with interest coupons attached. That said order was complied with by said San [25] Francisco Bank, and the 2,400 original notes and their accompanying trust deeds then in its possession, as mentioned in subparagraph (c) of heading No. 3 hereof,- and listed and described in detail on schedule pages 1 to 66 inc. thereof, and -identified on said schedule as “assigned,” and the U1 S. Government bearer bonds above listed and described, with attached interest coupons, were delivered and surrendered by said plaintiff San Francisco Bank to said Clerk of this Court, and into the registry thereof, in said action Nos. 5421-5678. 20. Making of U. S. Court Order of March 26, 1948, Returning to Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, of- Notes and Trust Deeds. - That thereafter, on March 26, 1948, this Court in action Nos. 5421-5678, made its “Order For Delivery Of .Notes .And Trust Deeds (Excess Collateral) From Clerk of Court To Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association.” That said order by its terms required the Clerk of this Court to deliver from the registry of the Court, and into the possession of defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, through its duly elected officers and directors, each of the original notes and their accompanying trust deeds, then in the possession of San Francisco Bank on March 13, 1948 as hereinafter listed and described on schedule pages 1 to 66 hereof. Said Order of Court was complied with by said Clerk, and said original notes and deeds of trust were so delivered by said Clerk to said Association. That said orders of March 13, and March 26,1948, by their terms, expressly provided that they were without prejudice to decision of, or affecting the rights of, the' various parties thereto, except that all liens or claims of liens were can-celled and removed from said original notes and deeds of trust, all endorsements thereon were cancelled and nullified, .and all trustees [26] under said deed of trust were directed to reconvey the same upon the sole order and direction of defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. 21. Transfer of Plaintiff San Francisco ■ Bank’s Lien from Homeowners’ Notes and Trust Deeds to Bonds and Cash in Court. The liens, claims and charges, if any, thus removed, were transferred from said original notes and deeds of trust, described in said schedule, and were transferred to, and placed upon, the said $5,300,000 U. S. Government bonds, attached interest coupons, and an additional sum of approximately $1,000,000 from the money then on deposit in the registry of said Court, sufficient, together with said bonds and coupons, to ■ equal the-total amount of the claims and demands of said plaintiff Bank upon the said four notes in the face amount of .$6,300,000... 22. Plaintiff San Francisco Bank Commenced Action in California State Court on Said $6,300,000 Notes to Foreclose Upon Bonds and Cash in U. S. Court, and Homeowners’ Notes and Trust Deeds, Whether Paid in Full or Not. That on or about March 27, 1952, plaintiff San Francisco Bank filed its complaint in the within action in the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the County of Los Angeles, said action being numbered in said State Court No. 597402. That such action is in five counts and, among other things, prays judgment for $6,300,000 alleged principal and ihterest on four promissory notes, Exhibits “A” to “D” of said complaint, of the establishment of a lien upon, and foreclosure of said lien upon, the said notes and deeds of trust in said schedule, and of said U. S. Government bonds and attached interest coupons previously herein described. [ 27] That said plaintiff Bank’s foreclosure action complaint reads in part as follows (page 7, lines 11 to 21): “That said defendant assigned, delivered and pledged to plaintiff * * * promissory notes secured by mortgages or deeds of trust on real property * * * as security for the repayment of said sums advanced and loaned to said defendant by said plaintiff * * * That by reason of said assignments and pledges said plaintiff became, ever since has been and still is the owner and holder of a lien upon all said pledged and assigned property.” The complaint prays judgment, (page 12, line 11): “For judgment foreclosing its aforesaid liens in the manner as provided by law; * * That by said complaint, plaintiff Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, sought to foreclose, as of prior to March 13th, 1948, a claimed lien upon all the notes and the deeds of trust, all money paid thereon by the borrowers, and the legal title to the several thousand separate parcels of real property of the homeowner-borrowers, covered by said notes and deeds of trust, as listed and described in the said schedule hereto attached ; that at the time of the filing the within complaint several thousand of said notes and deeds of trust had been paid in full and releases and reconveyances given thereon; and, that the borrowers on those notes and their accompanying trust deeds, set forth in said schedule which were not paid in full prior to the filing of said complaint, were continuing to pay installment payments,, monthly or otherwise, which payments, become, or will become, due under the terms of the notes and trust deeds to Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. That by such assertion in said complaint of ownership of the claimed lien upon all of the notes and trust deeds set forth in said schedule, the San Francisco Bank thereby clouded the title to each and every parcel of property upon which the notes had, or prior to date of judgment on the merits herein on issues; not decided hereby will have been, paid in full, and the trust deeds discharged and [28] released, and reconveyances issued, and clouded the titles to those which had not been paid in full, but upon which payments' had been made,, and clouded the title of the trustee under each of said deeds of trust, and the right of such trustee to execute, and to have executed, releases and reconveyances to the trustor upon payment in full of said notes and trust deeds, and clouded the title to the validity of the requests for reconveyances in the possession of said trustee, and clouded the right and title of all of the money paid by the payors and trustors on said notes and their accompanying trust deeds, to> and received by Long Beach Association and/or Ammann, as hereinbefore set. forth. That said assertions of right contained in the complaint of San Francisco Bank herein are more than mere pretentions, but are assertions of a positive right, and if San Francisco Bank were held to prevail therein, as to its claim of lien upon said notes and trust deeds and the properties covered thereby, or monies paid thereon, it would, result in an almost indescribable multiplicity of suits to quiet title, or for other relief, against numerous parties, involving 4,236 notes and their accompanying trust deeds on 3,944 separate parcels of property, which notes and trust deeds were executed by approximately 8,000 persons. That in the event the San Francisco Bank should prevail on the claims of lien on said notes and trust deeds, and the properties covered thereby, as claimed in their complaint,, the right and title of Long Beach Association to the notes and trust deeds listed in said schedule, and the right of Long Beach Association to receive the money paid to it by the borrower-trustors, as hereinelsewhere set forth, 'and to execute releases and requests for reconveyance on said trust deeds and notes, and the right of the trustee Title Service Company in each of said trust deeds and notes to execute and deliver reconveyances subsequent to March 13, 1948, would be invalidated, and the validity of each of the [29] re-conveyances executed by the trustee, and now being executed by the trustee in the course of business of Long Beach Association, would be brought in question .and would, or might, require separate suits to quiet title or for other relief, in order to settle the same, which suits would, or might, involve approximately 8,000 persons who had executed said trust deeds and notes covering approximately 4,000 separate parcels of property, many of which, since the date of reconveyance of legal title by said trustee, have been sold, transferred, or otherwise conveyed or encumbered by the trustors, who were the owners of such property at the time of the release and reconveyance of the notes and trust ■deeds, which would in turn require that such succeeding purchasers, owners, and holders, of such parcels be also made parties to any such suit. That from time to time in various briefs and statements in Court, counsel for San Francisco Bank have, contrary to the allegations contained in its complaint, disclaimed any desire to foreclose on said notes and their accompanying trust deeds and the legal titles involved therein, but that subsequent thereto counsel for San Francisco Bank, notwithstanding such previous statements, have asserted in open Court: “We state we stand on our complaint as it is filed * * and “It is the position of the San Francisco Bank that they are entitled to have full security for their $6,300,000, plus all interest due thereon, exactly as they had it at the time the money and the bonds and the notes and deeds of trust were taken from the possession of the San Francisco Bank and placed in the registry of the court. * 23. Removal of the Within Action to U. S. Court. That subsequent to the filing of said complaint in said California State Court, this action was duly removed from [30] said State Court to this Federal Court by defendant therein, Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association. That upon such removal, this action became numbered herein No. 13979-P.H. That remand of this action from this Federal to said State Court was denied by this Court by Memorandum Opinion and Order dated May 27, 1953, the text of which is set forth as appendix C, at pages- 125 to 128 of the typewritten Memorandum Opinion and Direction for Orders, etc., filed by this Court herein June 10th, 1954, 122 F.Supp. 401. 24. Defendant Home Loan Bank Board Approved San Francisco Bank’s Foreclosure Action No. 13979. That under applicable statutes, particularly Federal Home Loan Bank Act, Title 12 U.S.C.A. § 1432, and related sections, all actions by plaintiff Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, in-eluding its said foreclosure action herein, are required to be approved by Home Loan Bank Board, cross-defendant herein. That said San Francisco Bank and said Home Loan Bank Board claim and maintain that such approval of such foreclosure has been given by said Home Loan Bank Board. That one Mose Silverman, of counsel for said Home Loan Bank Board, testified in 1952, before this Court, that such approval to said San Francisco Bank’s foreclosure action, had been given individually and officially by each of the then three Home Loan Bank Board members. 25. Disclaimer by Plaintiff San Francisco Bank Made to U. S. District Court in Foreclosure Action No. 13979. That thereafter, on November 30th, 1953, plaintiff San Francisco Bank caused to be recorded in the official records of the County Recorder’s Office of Los Angeles County, in Book 43263 at pages 416-417 of Official Records, a document entitled Disclaimer, referring to said notes and deeds of trust and properties covered thereby. That thereafter, on January 18th, 1954, plaintiff [31] San Francisco Bank filed in the within case No. 13979-PH, said Disclaimer, executed and acknowledged by it, and previously recorded as aforesaid. That the effective date of such disclaimer was, and is, the date upon'which it was filed with this Court in this action No. 13979-PH, to-wit, January 18th, 1954. That such disclaimer is set forth in full, except for the acknowledgment, on pages 21 and 22 of the typewritten Memorandum Opinion and Direction for Orders, etc., filed by this Court herein, on June 10th, 1954, 122 F.Supp. 401, to which reference is made for all further particulars. 26. Homeowners Make Payments on Their Homes in Reliance Upon U. S. Court Judgments and Plaintiff’s Collection Agreements. That each of the homeowner-borrowers on the notes and trust deeds (approximately 8,000 individuals) listed on said schedule, or their predecessors or successors in interest, havé made monthly, or other, installment payments and/or payments in full, upon their respective notes and deeds of trust. That such payments were made, or caused to be made, to the Clerk of this Court and into the Registry of this Court, and/or to defendant Long Beach Federal Savings and Loan Association, or said Ammann. That such full or partial payments were so made both to said Ammann and/or said defendant Long Beach Association and to the Clerk of this Court, and were received by said Ammann and/or said Association, and acted upon by said Ammann and/or said Association and/or Title Service Company as trustee in reliance upon, or in compliance with, among other things: (a) Order No. 388 of the Home Loan Bank Board dated January 17, 1948, rescinding Order No. 5254 of the Federal [32] Home Loan Bank Administration, directing and authorizing A. V. Am.mann (and his deputies, agents, employees, and servants), to deliver all of the assets, records, and books, of any kind and nature, and of any description of said Long Beach Association to said Association, and to make a full and complete accounting for such assets and all liabilities of any and every kind and nature, and to file said Order and accounting with the United States District Court in Actions 5421-5678 of this Court (text of said Order found in Footnote 7, Mallonee v. Fahey, 14 F.R.D. 273, at page 285 — except that Action 5421 is misprinted thereon as 5254). (b) Previous judgments and orders of this Court in Actions Nos. 5421-5678, et al., in which appeals were taken, and dismissed, in several instances, and in the other instances from which no appeals were ever taken. Said San Francisco Bank, and said Ammann and/or Bramley, were parties to said proceedings and actions, and to all or many of said orders. The fact that such orders were made and recognized, and conformed to, and not appealed from by the parties affected thereby, including said San Francisco Bank and Ammann and/or Bramley, is material, but the validity or invalidity of such judgments and orders is immaterial to the judgment herein provided. (c) Upon the said collection agreements to which plaintiff and/or its predecessors were parties, heretofore referred to, by which said payments were expressly authorized to be made to, and to be collected and received by, said Ammann and/or said Long Beach Association respectively, which collection agreements have never been rescinded, revoked, cancelled, set aside, or modified San Francisco Bank by its complaint herein relies upon the said collection agreements, and such reliance, and the execution [33] thereof by said San Francisco Bank and/or its predecessors, are material. (d) The course of conduct of San Francisco Bank, Ammann and Bramley, as above and hereinelsewhere set forth, and in complying with the orders of March 13th, 1948, and March 26th, 1948, in actions Nos. 5421-5678, which orders required and resulted in the delivery to Long Beach Association of all of the notes and trust deeds which were, on March 13th, 1948, in the possession of San Francisco Bank, and held by them as claimed collateral security on the notes attached to plaintiff’s complaint herein, and which notes and trust deeds are among those specifically identified in the attached schedule, pages 1 to 121 hereof, and in failing to resist compliance with said orders, or either of them, by motions for rehearing, new trial, stay or appeal, and failing to make a motion to vacate until the expiration of more than one year after the effective date of said orders, (which motion to vacate was denied, and no motion for rehearing thereof or appeal was taken therefrom), and by not filing any proceedings in any court to collect on said notes attached to plaintiff’s complaint herein, or foreclose their claimed lien until four years after the date of said orders in 1948. That as a result of said judgments, orders, agreements, and course of conduct, each, every, and all of the obligortrustors on the notes and trust deeds set forth and described in the schedule, and Title Service Company as trustee, and Long Beach Association as payee on said notes and beneficiary under said trust deeds, were entitled to, and could, and did, rely upon their right to quiet enjoyment in, and to, their respective interests and rights, and title, in, to, and under, said notes, and trust deeds and the real property covered thereby. 27. Reliance by Homeowners, Their Successors, and Others, on Payments on Notes and Trust Deeds and Instruments Releasing and Clearing Same. That each, every and all of the persons who were and/or are homeowner-obligors on the notes and trust deeds, and who or which paid or discharged the same in full, prior to January 18, 1954, listed and identified in said schedule as “paid” totalling approximately 6,000 and involving 3,043 separately owned parcels of real property, relied upon the payment and discharge in full of their obligations on and under said notes and trust deeds, and/or upon the separate individual releases and requests for reconveyance, and/or reconveyances given, and their rights to make such payments, and to receive such instruments to secure them, and each of them, and to receive a legal title to each separate parcel of property involved, free and clear of any and all rights, liabilities, duties or obligations, or possible claims, which are or might be asserted by anyone, arising out of, or on or in connection with, said notes and trust deeds; and thereafter dealt with the property as being free and clear thereof and therefrom, and that many of them in the course of business, secured other loans upon their property, or sold the same to other persons who secured loans; that Long Beach Association, in reliance upon its actual or apparent right so to do, received the money from the payers and borrowers on said notes, and executed releases and requests for reconveyances; and that Title Service Company recognized said requests as legal and valid, and executed reconveyances in reliance upon the validity of such requests for same. [ 34-a] That thus, in addition to the approximately 6,000 persons who paid their notes and trust deeds in full and did or did not receive releases and requests for reconveyance a