Opinion
Page 1557g
143 Cal.App.4th 1557g __ Cal.Rptr.3d __ WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. B.C.B.U. et al., Defendants and Appellants. G035470 California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Third Division October 27, 2006Super. Ct. No. 03CC02347
BEDSWORTH, Acting P. J.
It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on September 27, 2006 (143 Cal.App.4th 493; 49 Cal.Rptr.3d 324), be modified in the following particular, and and the petition for rehearing is DENIED:
On page 15 [143 Cal.App.4th 507, advance report, 3d full par, line 6], at the end of the last sentence of the first full paragraph, add the following footnote:
“In a late petition for rehearing, B.C.B.U. raises a new argument, that section 9403 does not apply because it became operative on July 1, 2001, after the December 2000 assignment to Wells Fargo. Unfortunately, like the petition for rehearing which raised it for the first time, it comes too late (the petition for rehearing was 7 days late). An argument may not be raised for the first time in a petition for rehearing. (See, e.g., Reynolds v. Bement (2005) 36 Cal.4th 1075, 1092 [32 Cal.Rptr.3d 483]) Moreover, section 9403 is based on former section 9206 (set out in footnote 6 above), and the former rule was the same as the present one, that is, a waiver of defenses against an assignee is enforceable save for defenses good against a holder in due course.”
This does not effect a change in judgment.
O'Leary, J., and Ikola, J., concurred.