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. Log Cabin Ponderosa Homeowners Association

United States District Court, D. Nevada

July 22, 2019

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Plaintiff,
v.
LOG CABIN PONDEROSA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCATION, et al., Defendants.

          AMENDED ORDER

          JAMES C. MAHAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         On April 3, 2019, the Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded the court's order entering summary judgment against plaintiff Bank of America, N.A. ("BANA"). Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's directive, the court hereby adjudicates this matter consistent with Bank of America, N.A. v. Arlington West Twilight Homeowners Association, No. 17-15796, 2019 WL 1461317 (9th Or. April 3, 2019) ("Arlington").

         I. Facts

         This action arises from a dispute over real property located at 10342 Hanky Panky Street, Las Vegas, Nevada 89131 (the "property”). (ECF No. 1).

         Christopher and Jennifer Glover (the "Glovers") purchased the property on or about July 21, 2009. See (ECF No. 57-1). The Glovers financed the purchase with a loan in the amount of $406, 978.00 from DHI Mortgage Company, Ltd ("DHI"). Id. GHI secured the loan with a deed of trust, which names GHI as the lender, DHI Title of Nevada as the trustee, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS") as the beneficiary as nominee for the lender and lender's successors and assigns. Id. On March 6, 2012, BANA acquired all beneficial interest in the deed of trust via an assignment, which BANA recorded with the Clark County recorder's office. (ECF No. 57-3).

         On August 29, 2013, defendant Log Cabin Ponderosa Homeowners Association ("Log Cabin"), through its agent defendant Nevada Association Services, Inc. ("NAS"), recorded a notice of delinquent assessment lien ("the lien") against the property for the Glovers' failure to pay Log Cabin in the amount of $1, 757.62. (ECF No. 57-4). On October 11, 2013, Log Cabin recorded a notice of default and election to sell pursuant to the lien, stating that the amount due was $2, 689.28 as of October 8, 2013. (ECF No. 57-5).

         In an attempt to exercise its right of redemption, BANA requested from Log Cabin the superpriority amount of the lien. (ECF No. 57-7). In response, Log Cabin provided a payoff ledger of the Glovers' total amount due from November 2012 to March 2014. Id. The payoff ledger shows an outstanding balance of $3, 054.72 but does not state what portion of the balance constitutes the superpriority portion of the lien. Id. The ledger also does not include charges for maintenance and nuisance abatement. Id. The ledger does state, however, that Log Cabin's monthly assessment against the property was $58.00. Id.

         BANA used Log Cabin's ledger to calculate the superpriority amount as $522.00, the sum of nine months of common assessments. Id. On March 13, 2014, BANA sent a letter and a check for that amount to Log Cabin. Id. The letter explained that the check was the sum of nine months of common assessments and intended to pay off the superpriority portion of the lien. Id. Log Cabin rejected the payment without explanation. Id.

         On July 25, 2014, Log Cabin recorded a notice of foreclosure sale against the property. (ECF No. 57-6). On August 22, 2014, Log Cabin sold the property in a nonjudicial foreclosure sale to defendant MRT Assets, LLC ("MRT") in exchange for $62, 000.00. (ECF No. 57-8). On August 25, 2014, MRT recorded the foreclosure deed with the Clark County recorder's office. Id. On February 10, 2015, defendant TRP Fund V, LLC ("TRP") acquired all beneficial interest in the property via a quitclaim deed. (ECF No. 57-10).

         On February 25, 2016, BANA initiated this action, asserting four causes of action: (1) quiet title/declaratory judgment against all defendants; (2) breach of NRS 116.1113 against NAS and Log Cabin; (3) wrongful foreclosure against NAS and Log Cabin; and (4) injunctive relief against TRP. (ECF No. 1). On March 2, 2016, TRP filed an answer, counterclaim and third- party complaint to quiet title. (ECF No, 6).

         On April 18, 2017, the court entered summary judgment, holding that the foreclosure sale extinguished the deed of trust. (ECF No. 73). That same day, the clerk entered judgment. (ECF No. 74).

         On May 17, 2017, BANA appealed to the Ninth Circuit. (ECF No. 75). On April 3, 2019, the Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded the court's April 18, 2017, order and directed the court to commence proceedings consistent with Arlington. (ECF No. 82). Now, the court adjudicates the merits of this action.

         II. Legal Standard

         The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow summary judgment when the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that "there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A principal purpose of summary judgment is "to isolate and dispose of factually unsupported claims." Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323-24 (1986).

         For purposes of summary judgment, disputed factual issues should be construed in favor of the non-moving party. Lujan v. Nat'l Wildlife Fed, 497 U.S. 871, 888 (1990). However, to be entitled to a denial of summary judgment, the nonmoving party must "set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Id.

         In determining summary judgment, a court applies a burden-shifting analysis. The moving party must first satisfy its initial burden. "When the party moving for summary judgment would bear the burden of proof at trial, it must come forward with evidence which would entitle it to a directed verdict if the evidence went uncontroverted at trial. In such a case, the moving party has the initial burden of establishing the absence of a genuine issue of fact on each issue material ...


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.