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.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Platinum Realty And Holdings, LLC

United States District Court, D. Nevada

May 8, 2018

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., a national I banking association; Plaintiff,
v.
PLATINUM REALTY AND HOLDINGS LLC, a Nevada limited-liability company; SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, a Nevada limited-liability company, SPRING MOUNTAIN RANCH MASTER ASSOCIATION, a Nevada non-profit corporation; NEVADA ASSOCIATION SERVICES, INC., a Nevada corporation company; Defendants. SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, Counter-Claimant,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., a national banking association; BARBARA J. FORFA, an individual, Counter-Defendant/Cross-Defendant.

          Diana S. Ebron, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10580 Jacqueline A. Gilbert, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10593 Karen L. Hanks, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 09578 Kim Gilbert Ebron Attorneys for SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC

          Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. Wayne Klomp, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10109 Amy F. Sorenson, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12495 Attorney for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

          LEACH JOHNSON SONG & GRUCHOW Sean L. Anderson, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 7259 T. Chase Pittsenbarger, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 13740 Attorney for Spring Mountain Ranch Master Association

          STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION PENDING FINAL RESOLUTION OF CERTIFIED QUESTION BEFORE THE NEVADA SUPREME COURT

         Pursuant to LR IA 6-2 and LR 7-1, Defendant/Counterclaimant/Cross-Claimant, SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC ("SFR"), PlaintifT/Counter-defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), and Defendant SPRING MOUNTAIN RANCH MASTER ASSOCIATION (the "Association") (collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, hereby submit the following Stipulation and Order Staying Case Pending Resolution of Certified Question Before the Nevada Supreme Court:

         1. This lawsuit involves the parties seeking quiet title/declaratory relief and other claims related to a non-judicial home owner's foreclosure sale conducted on a Property pursuant to NRS Chapter 116.

         2. On August 12, 2016, the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, 832 F.3d 1154, 1156 (9th Or. 2016) ("Bourne Valley") holding that NRS Chapter 116 is facially unconstitutional.

         3. Competing motions for summary judgment were filed by each of the parties to this litigation in early 2016. [ECF No.'s 41, 46, 63].

         4. A Stipulation and Order to Stay Litigation Pending Final Resolution of Petition(s) for Writ of Certiorari to United States Supreme Court was previously entered in this case on March 10, 2017. [ECF No. 77].

         5. Ao Order administratively denying all pending motions without prejudice [ECF No.'s 41, 46, 63 and 67] was entered on March 10, 2017, providing that, after the stay was lifted, the parties could, by notice to the Court, reinstate their respective motions. [ECF No. 78].

         6. On January 26, 2017, the Nevada Supreme Court issued its decision in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg, 388 P.3d 970 (Nev. 2017) ("Saticoy Bay"), holding, in direct contrast to Bourne Valley, that no state action supported a challenge under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. The Nevada Supreme Court further concluded in Saticoy Bay that since due process was not implicated and it "need not determine whether NRS 116.3116 et seq. incorporates the notice requirements set forth in NRS 107.090, " thereby requiring notice to subordinate mortgage lenders. Saticoy Bay, 388 P.3d at 974.

         7. The Nevada Supreme Court's decision in Saticoy Bay contradicts the Bourne Valley court's conclusions and creates a split in authority between the state and federal courts on the same issue.

         8. Accordingly, on April 26, 2017, a certified a question was presented to the Nevada Supreme Court regarding NRS 116's notice requirement. See The Bank of New York Mellon v. Star Hill Homeowners Association, et a/., Case No. 2:16-cv-02561-RFB-PAL, [ECF No. 41].

         9. Specifically, the certified question presented is as follows: "Whether NRS § 116.31168(1)'s incorporation of NRS § 107.090 requires homeowner's association to provide notices of default to banks even when a bank does not request notice?"

         10. The Nevada Supreme Court issued an Order accepting the certified question on June 13, 2017. See Nevada Supreme Court, Case No. 72931. Briefing in that matter is currently completed and 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.