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.

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Vegas Property Services, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Nevada

March 30, 2019

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
VEGAS PROPERTY SERVICES, INC., Defendant. VEGAS PROPERTY SERVICES, INC., Counter-Claimant,
v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC and BARBARA J. ESSES, Counter-Defendants.

          ORDER

          RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Before the Court are three contested motions: Defendant Vegas Property Service, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 28; Plaintiff Nationstar Mortgage, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 30; and Nationstar's Motion to Extend Time. ECF No. 33.

         II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         This matter arises from a nonjudicial foreclosure sale conducted by a homeowners' association under Nevada Revised Statutes (“NRS”) Chapter 116. Nationstar sued Vegas Property on February 27, 2017, alleging two claims: (1) quiet title or declaratory judgment and (2) injunctive relief. ECF No. 1. Nationstar alleges the foreclosure sale could not have extinguished its interest in the property for several reasons. Id. at 6-10. Its main allegation is that the foreclosure sale, as conducted under Chapter 116, violated its due process rights guaranteed by the federal and the state constitutions. Id. at 6-8. But it also alleges additional bases for its argument: the recorded foreclosure notices failed to describe the super-priority component of the homeowners' association's lien; the homeowners' association would have rejected tender to satisfy the super-priority lien; the foreclosure sale was commercially unreasonable; the recorded notices provided improper calculations of the super-priority component of the homeowners' association's lien; and, the purchasers at the foreclosure sale do not qualify as bona fide purchasers. Id. at 8-10. Further, on the same day as filing its complaint, Nationstar filed a notice of lis pendens on the property and a certificate of interested parties. ECF Nos. 4, 2. In the certificate of interested parties, Nationstar certified that “there are no known interested parties other than [Nationstar and Vegas Property].” ECF No. 2 at 1.

         Vegas Property answered the complaint and asserted a counterclaim on March 24, 2017. ECF No. 10. In its counterclaim, Vegas Property also seeks to quiet title or for declaratory relief against Nationstar and against Defendant Barbara Esses. Id. Nationstar answered the counterclaim on April 4, 2017, asserting various affirmative defenses. ECF No. 11. Esses has not yet participated in this action. See docket generally.

         On July 12, 2018, the Court stayed the matter pending a decision on a question certified to the Nevada Supreme Court regarding the notice requirements of Chapter 116. ECF No. 27. The Court denied two dispositive motions without prejudice to refiling after the certified question was resolved. Id. The Nevada Supreme Court issued its decision in August 2018.

         Vegas Property now moves for summary judgment. ECF No. 28. Nationstar opposed the motion, and Vegas Property replied. ECF Nos. 34, 36.

         Nationstar also moves for summary judgment. ECF No. 30. Vegas Property opposed, and Nationstar replied. ECF Nos. 32, 35. Nationstar also seeks to extend the deadline to respond to Vegas Property's motion. ECF No. 33. The motion was fully briefed. ECF Nos. 37, 38.

         III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         a. Undisputed facts

         This matter centers on the parties' interests in a property located at 5710 East Tropicana Avenue, Unit 2106, Las Vegas, Nevada 89122. Esses borrowed funds from Moneyline Lending Services, Inc. to purchase the property in 2006 and recorded a corresponding deed of trust on January 5, 2007. The property sits in a community governed by a homeowners' association. Thus, Esses was responsible for making timely payments of the homeowners' association dues. When she failed to do so, the homeowners' association foreclosed on the property. The foreclosure sale occurred on November 1, 2013.

         But Nationstar provides evidence, consistent with that which is required by the Nevada Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit, to establish that Federal National Mortgage Association (”Fannie Mae”) purchased the loan (the promissory note and the deed of trust) in January 2007. Fannie Mae has owned the loan ever since. Nationstar began servicing the loan as of May 7, 2013.

         In 2008, Congress enacted the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (“HERA”), 12 U.S.C. § 4511 et seq. HERA established the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Agency”), an independent federal agency with regulatory and oversight authority over Fannie ...


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.