e can in and of itself constitute a taking under Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.30.FACTS:The defendant (the borrower) took out a loan against her home with New Century Mortgage. The borrower tried to rescind the loan agreement, but New Century did not respond and they subsequently went bankrupt.The plaintiff (Holder) then acquired the defendant’s promissory note from a bankruptcy sale and initiated foreclosure proceedings with Borrower.PROCEDURAL HISTORY:Plaintiff (Holder) filed a foreclosure action against defendant (Borrower), and defendant filed several counter-complaints against plaintiff, including financial elder abuse. Holder moved to dismiss the counter-complaints.ISSUE:Is the defendant liable for elder financial abuse?RULE OF LAW:Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15610.30ANALYSIS:Borrower’s counter-complaint claims that the non-judicial foreclosure proceeding was enough to constitute a taking under §15610.30. The court notes that Holder may be protected by the qualified privilege of California Civil Code § 47(c) so long as its conduct was not malicious.The Court notes that Borrower’s counter-complaint does suggest that Holder acted maliciously; however, the alleged malice is insufficiently specific. The court dismissed the claim for elder financial abuse but gave the borrower leave to amend to include specific allegations of malice.