Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

STEVE AYRES TRUSTEE OF THE 3135 MOJAVE 128 TRUST, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Respondent.

Hardesty

An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123. ORDER VACATING, REVERSING, AND REMANDING

This is an appeal from a district court order, certified as final under NRCP 54(b), denying a motion for a preliminary injunction and granting a motion to dismiss in a quiet title action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Ronald J. Israel, Judge.

The district court denied appellant's preliminary injunction motion and granted respondent's motion to dismiss, finding that appellant had failed to state a viable claim for relief because "a foreclosure sale of a homeowner's association assessment lien under N.R.S. 116.3116 et seq., including N.R.S. 116.3116(2)[ ], does not extinguish a first position Deed of Trust." This court's recent disposition in SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 130 Nev. ___, 334 P.3d 408 (2014), decides that a common-interest community association's NRS 116.3116(2) superpriority lien has true priority over a first security interest, and the association may nonjudicially foreclose on that lien. The district court's decisions thus were based on an erroneous interpretation of the controlling law and did not reach the other issues colorably asserted. Accordingly, we

VACATE the portion of the order denying preliminary injunctive relief, REVERSE the portion of the order granting the motion to dismiss, AND REMAND this matter to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.

/s/_________, J.


Hardesty


/s/_________, J.


Douglas
CHERRY, J., concurring:

For the reasons stated in the SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 130 Nev. ___, 334 P.3d 408 (2014), dissent, I disagree that respondent lost its lien priority by virtue of the homeowners association's nonjudicial foreclosure sale. I recognize, however, that SFR Investments is now the controlling law and, thusly, concur in the disposition of this appeal.

/s/_________, J.


Cherry
cc: Hon. Ronald J. Israel, District Judge


The Dean Legal Group, Ltd.


Wright, Finlay & Zak, LLP/Las Vegas


Eighth District Court Clerk


Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Ayres v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
(Nov 25, 2014)