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. Palm Hills Homeowners Association, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Nevada

February 9, 2018

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. Plaintiff,
v.
PALM HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; VERN ELMER; and NEVADA ASSOCIATION SERVICES, INC. Defendants. VERN ELMER, an individual, Counterclaimant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., a National Association; DOE INDIVIDUALS I-X; and ROE CORPORATIONS I-X, inclusive. Counterdefendants.

          GERRARD COX LARSEN Douglas D. Gerrard, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 4613 Nathan R. Henderson, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 13145 Attorneys for Plaintiff / Counterdefendant Bank of America, N.A.

          NEVADA ASSOCIATION SERVICES, INC. Brandon E. Wood, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12900 Attorney for Defendant Nevada Association Services, Inc.

          BOYACK ORME & TAYLOR Edward D. Boyack, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 5229 Colli C. McKiever, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 13724 Attorney for Defendant Palm Hills Homeowners Association

          AYON LAW, PLLC Luis A. Ayon, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 9752 Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant, Vern Elmer

          [PROPOSED] STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES [SECOND REQUEST]

         Pursuant to Local Rules IA 6-1 and 26-4, Plaintiff/Counterdefendant BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. (“BANA”), by and through its attorneys Gerrard Cox Larsen; Defendant PALM HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., (“Palm Hills HOA”) by and through its attorneys Boyack Orme & Anthony; Defendant NEVADA ASSOCIATION SERVICES, INC. (“NAS”), by and thorough its attorney, Brandon E. Wood, Esq.; and Defendant/Counterclaimant VERN ELMER (“Elmer”), by and through his attorneys, Ayon Law PLLC (collectively, the “Parties”); hereby stipulate and agree, subject to approval by the Court, to extend the discovery deadline set out in the Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery Deadlines [First Request] dated October 16, 2017 [ECF No. 48], as further set forth herein.

         I. INTRODUCTION AND RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On Match 18, 2016, BANA filed its Complaint in this case. [ECF No. 1].

         On April 7, 2016, Palm Hills HOA filed its Answer. [ECF No. 9].

         On April 25, 2016, NAS filed its Answer. [ECF No. 14].

         On April 22, 2016, BANA served its Initial Disclosures of Witness and Documents pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(A)(1).

         On May 17, the Parties submitted their proposed Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order, and on May 18, 2016, the Court entered its Order approving the same. [ECF No. 23].

         On June 20, 2016, Elmer filed his Answer and a Counterclaim against BANA. [ECF No. 31].

         On July 27, 2016, BANA filed its Answer to the Counterclaim. [ECF No. 35].

         On August 19, 2016, the Court, sua sponte, entered its Order Temporarily Staying the Case, pending the Ninth Circuit issuing a mandate in Bourne Valley Court Tr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA (the "Stay Order") [ECF No. 36].

         On December 14, 2016, the Ninth Circuit issued its mandate in Bourne Valley. And on June 26, 2017, the United States Supreme Court denied the Bourne Valley petition to the ...


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.