United States District Court, D. Nevada
MIRANDA DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
dispute arises from a homeowners' association foreclosure
sale. Before the Court is Plaintiffs Bank of America, N.A.
(“BANA”), Federal Housing Finance Agency
(“FHFA”), and Federal National Mortgage
Association's (“Fannie Mae”) motion for
summary judgment (“Motion”) seeking a declaration
that the foreclosure sale did not extinguish Fannie Mae's
interest in the property at issue on the basis of the federal
foreclosure bar (ECF No. 60). Because the Court finds that the
federal foreclosure bar applies here, the Court will grant
The Loan and the HOA Sale
about July 15, 2005, Brett R. Gundle and Julie R. Gundle
(“Borrowers”) obtained a loan (the
“Loan”) from Quicken Loans, Inc.
(“Lender”) for $184, 000. (ECF No. 60 at 5.) The
Loan was secured by a deed of trust (“DOT”)
recorded against Borrowers' property located at 7501
Bluestone Drive, Reno, Nevada (“the Property”).
(Id.) Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
(“MERS”) was the nominee beneficiary on the DOT.
September 2005, Fannie Mae purchased the Loan and acquired
ownership of the DOT. (Id. at 6.) The DOT was
assigned to BANA on December 13, 2012. (Id.) BANA
continues to service the loan for Fannie Mae. (Id.)
Borrowers failed to make any payments to the HOA, the lawyer
for the HOA recorded a notice of delinquent assessment on
March 9, 2010, followed by a Notice of Default and Election
to Sell, and a Notice of Foreclosure Sale against the
Property. (Id. at 7.) On October 4, 2010, the HOA
foreclosed on the Property, and purchased the Property for
$2, 526.51 (the “HOA Sale”). (Id.) On
January 4, 2011, a grant bargain sale deed transferring title
from the HOA to Beverly was recorded in the Washoe County
recorder's office. (Id.)
assert a claim for declaratory judgment against all
Defendants, and two claims for quiet title and injunctive
relief against Beverly. (ECF No. 1.) Beverly asserted
counterclaims for quiet title and her attorneys' fees.
(ECF No. 11.)
Summary Judgment Proceedings
Court stayed this case pending the Ninth Circuit's
issuance of the mandate in Bourne Valley Court Trust v.
Wells Fargo Bank on August 23, 2016. (ECF No. 30.) The
Court then lifted that stay on January 19, 2017. (ECF No.
filed a motion for summary judgment (“First
MSJ”). (ECF No. 42; see also ECF Nos. 45, 46,
47 (responses and reply).) In response, Beverly argued in
relevant part that “any arguments based on Exhibits B,
D, H and I to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment
[ECF No. 42-1 and 42-2] should be stricken and disregarded
pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 37(c) for the reason that
Plaintiffs have not previously disclosed those documents or
the identity of the witness identified therein to Beverly, as
required by Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 26(a)(1).” (ECF No. 45 at
2.) Regarding these exhibits to their First MSJ, Plaintiffs
conceded that they failed to disclose the information they
included and their corresponding authenticating witnesses
during discovery, stating that it was “an
oversight” because “when the case was released
from its stay in January 2017, Plaintiffs mistakenly believed
that these initial disclosures had already been served prior
to the stay.” (ECF No. 47 at 7.)
light of Plaintiffs' concession, the Court held a hearing
on Plaintiff's First MSJ on August 30, 2018 (the
“Hearing”). (ECF No. 55.) At the Hearing, the
Court denied the First MSJ without prejudice and gave Beverly
more time to conduct discovery regarding Fannie Mae's
interest in the Property. (Id.) Upon conclusion of
that additional discovery period, Plaintiffs filed the Motion
with the Court's leave. (ECF No. 60; see also
ECF Nos. 58, 59 (requesting and granting leave to Plaintiffs
to file a renewed motion for summary judgment.)