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 America, N.A. v. Desert Sands Villas Homeowners' Association

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 26, 2017

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Plaintiffs,
v.
DESERT SANDS VILLAS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, et al., Defendants.

          ORDER

         Presently before the court is defendant Desert Sands Villas Homeowners' Association's (the “HOA”) motion to dismiss. (ECF No. 11). Plaintiff Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) filed a response (ECF No. 15), and the HOA filed a reply (ECF No. 21).

         I. Introduction

         This case involves competing interests in the real property at 854 Stainglass Lane in Las Vegas, Nevada 89110 after a nonjudicial HOA foreclosure sale. (ECF No. 11). Notably, BANA's complaint alleges that BANA had attempted tender, which was purportedly refused by an agent of the HOA. (ECF No. 1).

         BANA asserts four claims in the present case: (1) Quiet title/declaratory judgment against all defendants; (2) breach of Nevada Revised Statutes (“NRS”) § 116.1113 against the HOA and co-defendant Nevada Association Services, Inc. (“NAS”); (3) wrongful foreclosure against the HOA and NAS; and (4) injunctive relief against co-defendant Mr. Chun. (ECF No. 1).

         Here, the HOA argues, inter alia, that BANA has not complied with NRS 38.310's mediation requirement and that BANA's arguments and allegations in favor of its quiet title claim are insufficient to support the claim. See (ECF No. 11).

         II. Legal Standard

         The court may dismiss a plaintiff's 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). Although rule 8 does not require detailed factual allegations, it does require more than labels and conclusions. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). Furthermore, a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not suffice. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677 (2009) (citation omitted). Rule 8 does not unlock the doors of discovery for a plaintiff armed with nothing more than conclusions. Id. at 678-79.

         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.” Id. A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Id. When a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendant's liability, and shows only a mere possibility of entitlement, the complaint does not meet the requirements to show plausibility of entitlement to relief. Id.

         In Iqbal, the Supreme Court clarified the two-step approach district courts are to apply when considering a motion to dismiss. Id. First, the court must accept as true all of the allegations contained in a complaint. However, this requirement is inapplicable to legal conclusions. Id. Second, only a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss. 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. at 679. When the allegations in a complaint have not crossed the line from conceivable to plausible, plaintiff's claim must be dismissed. Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570.

         The Ninth Circuit addressed post-Iqbal pleading standards in Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202, 1216 (9th Cir. 2011). The Starr court held:

First, to be entitled to the presumption of truth, allegations in a complaint or counterclaim may not simply recite the elements of a cause of action, but must contain sufficient allegations of underlying facts to give fair notice and to enable the opposing party to defend itself effectively. Second, the factual allegations that are taken as true must plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief, such that it is not unfair to require the opposing party to be subjected to the expense of discovery and continued litigation.

Id.

         III. Discussion

         A. Wrongful foreclosure and ...


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.