Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bank of New York Mellon v. Homeowner Association Services, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 5, 2017

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Plaintiff(s),
v.
HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION SERVICES, INC., et al., Defendant(s).

          ORDER

         Presently before the court is defendant Starfire Estates VI Owners Association's (the “HOA”) motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 8). Plaintiff Bank of New York Mellon (“BNYM”) filed a response (ECF No. 13), to which the HOA replied (ECF No. 15).

         Also before the court is defendant Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2708 Stargate's (“Saticoy”) motion to dismiss (ECF No. 10), in which the HOA joined (ECF No. 12). BNYM filed a response. (ECF No. 14).

         I. Facts

         This case involves a dispute over real property located at 2708 Stargate Street, Las Vegas, Nevada 89108 (the “property”). On November 8, 2004, Shawn Horter obtained a loan in the amount of $153, 920.00 to purchase the property, which was secured by a deed of trust recorded on November 12, 2004. (ECF No. 1).

         On March 30, 2010, defendant Homeowner Association Services (“HAS”), acting on behalf of the HOA, recorded a notice of delinquent assessment lien, stating an amount due of $1, 185.00. (ECF No. 1). On October 6, 2010, HAS recorded a notice of default and election to sell to satisfy the delinquent assessment lien. (ECF No. 1).

         On December 29, 2010, Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) allegedly paid $2, 831.47 to satisfy the full amount of the lien. (ECF No. 1 at 5). Shortly thereafter, by release of claim of lien and notice of rescission of default and election to sell, both recorded January 27, 2011, the HOA, through its agent Homeowner, released the March 30, 2010 lien and cancelled, rescinded, and withdrew the October 6, 2010 notice of default. (ECF No. 1 at 5).

         The deed of trust was assigned to BNYM via an assignment of deed of trust recorded on February 28, 2012. (ECF No. 1).

         On February 5, 2013, HAS recorded a notice of delinquent assessment lien, stating an amount due of $999.93. (ECF No. 1). On May 28, 2014, HAS recorded a notice of default and election to sell to satisfy the delinquent assessment lien, stating an amount due of $5, 546.80. (ECF No. 1).

         On February 2, 2015, HAS recorded a notice of trustee's sale, stating an amount due of $9, 395.30. (ECF No. 1). On February 19, 2015, Saticoy purchased the property at the foreclosure sale for $45, 100.00. (ECF No. 1). A trustee's deed upon sale in favor of Saticoy was recorded on March 11, 2015. (ECF No. 1).

         On February 7, 2017, BNYM filed the underlying complaint, alleging five causes of action: (1) quiet title/declaratory judgment against all defendants; (2) breach of NRS 116.1113 against HAS and the HOA; (3) wrongful foreclosure against HAS and the HOA; (4) injunctive relief against Saticoy; and (5) deceptive trade practices against HAS and the HOA. (ECF No. 1).

         In the instant motions, the HOA and Saticoy move to dismiss the complaint. (ECF Nos. 8, 10).

         II. Legal Standard

         A court may dismiss a complaint for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). A properly pled complaint must provide “[a] short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). While Rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it demands “more than labels and conclusions” or a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citation omitted).

         “Factual allegations must be enough to rise above the speculative level.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555. Thus, to survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter to “state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citation omitted).

         In Iqbal, the Supreme Court clarified the two-step approach district courts are to apply when considering motions to dismiss. First, the court must accept as true all well-pled factual allegations in the complaint; however, legal conclusions are not entitled to the assumption of truth. Id. at 678-79. Mere recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported only by conclusory statements, do not suffice. Id. at 678.

         Second, the court must consider whether the factual allegations in the complaint allege a plausible claim for relief. Id. at 679. A claim is facially plausible when the plaintiff's complaint alleges facts that allow the court to draw a reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the alleged misconduct. Id. at 678.

         Where the complaint does not permit the court to infer more than the mere possibility of misconduct, the complaint has “alleged-but not shown-that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). When the allegations in a complaint have not crossed the line from ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.