United States District Court, D. Nevada
before the court is plaintiffs JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
(“Chase”), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
(“Freddie Mac”), and Federal Housing Finance
Authority's (“FHFA”) motion for summary
judgment. (ECF No. 21). Defendant Las Vegas
Development Group, LLC (“LVDG”) filed a response
(ECF No. 25), and plaintiffs filed a reply (ECF No. 26).
filed their complaint on September 3, 2015. (ECF No. 1). That
document describes the August 23, 2010, foreclosure sale
wherein Giavanna Homeowners Association (the
“HOA”) purchased the real estate at 3628 Lakeside
Villas Avenue, North Las Vegas, Nevada. (Id.). On
March 31, 2011, the HOA conveyed its interest via quitclaim
deed to defendant. (Id.).
seek declaratory relief for their quiet title claim against
LVDG, arguing that FHFA, which has become Freddie Mac's
conservator, has not consented to the HOA foreclosure
sale's extinguishment of its secured interest in the
property, as required by federal law. (Id.).
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow summary judgment when
the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and
admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,
show that “there is no genuine dispute as to any
material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a
matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A principal purpose
of summary judgment is “to isolate and dispose of
factually unsupported claims . . . .” Celotex Corp.
v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323- 24 (1986).
purposes of summary judgment, disputed factual issues should
be construed in favor of the non-moving party. Lujan v.
Nat'l Wildlife Fed., 497 U.S. 871, 888 (1990).
However, to be entitled to a denial of summary judgment, the
non-moving party must “set forth specific facts showing
that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Id.
determining summary judgment, the court applies a
burden-shifting analysis. “When the party moving for
summary judgment would bear the burden of proof at trial, it
must come forward with evidence which would entitle it to a
directed verdict if the evidence went uncontroverted at
trial.” C.A.R. Transp. Brokerage Co. v. Darden
Rests., Inc., 213 F.3d 474, 480 (9th Cir. 2000).
Moreover, “[i]n such a case, the moving party has the
initial burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue
of fact on each issue material to its case.”
contrast, when the non-moving party bears the burden of
proving the claim or defense, the moving party can meet its
burden in two ways: (1) by presenting evidence to negate an
essential element of the non-moving party's case; or (2)
by demonstrating that the non-moving party failed to make a
showing sufficient to establish an element essential to that
party's case on which that party will bear the burden of
proof at trial. See Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at
323-24. If the moving party fails to meet its initial burden,
summary judgment must be denied and the court need not
consider the non-moving party's evidence. See Adickes
v. S.H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 159- 60 (1970).
moving party satisfies its initial burden, the burden then
shifts to the opposing party to establish that a genuine
issue of material fact exists. See Matsushita Elec.
Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586
(1986). To establish the existence of a factual dispute, the
opposing party need not establish a material issue of fact
conclusively in its favor. It is sufficient that “the
claimed factual dispute be shown to require a jury or judge
to resolve the parties' differing versions of the truth
at trial.” T.W. Elec. Serv., Inc. v. Pac. Elec.
Contractors Ass'n, 809 F.2d 626, 630 (9th Cir.
1987). . . .
. . .
insists that § 4617(j)(3) of the Housing and Economic
Recovery Act of 2008 (“HERA”) preempts state law
and bars the foreclosure of the underlying property without
FHFA's consent. (ECF No. 21); see also 12 U.S.C.
§ 4617(j)(3). Thus, plaintiffs believe that they are
entitled to summary judgment because the HOA's
foreclosure sale could not disrupt Freddie Mac's property
interest. (ECF No. 21).
Nevada Revised Statute (“NRS”) 116.3116, a
homeowner's association (“HOA”) has a lien on
a property for assessments levied against that property and
such liens are prior to all other liens and encumbrances,
subject to exceptions. Nev. Rev. Stat. 116.3116(1)-(2). In
SFR Investments Pool 1, the Nevada Supreme Court
found that a HOA's foreclosure ...