A-21-828840-C court record

A-21-828840-C COURT RECORD

Date  Doc #Court Record
4/1/23 Register of Actions
2/3/20211Doc ID# 1 Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure
02/03/212Doc ID# 2 Complaint for interpleader
02/03/213Doc ID# 3 Electronic Summons for Nona Tobin, as an individual and as trustee for the Gordon B. Hansen Trust, dated 8/22/08
2/9/20217Doc ID# 7 Notice of Department Reassignment
2/17/20218Doc ID# 8 Affidavit of service-Republic Services
2/17/20219Doc ID# 9 Affidavit of service- Wells Fargo
2/17/202110Doc ID# 10 Affidavit of service Nona Tobin, as an individual served via attorney John Thomson
2/17/202111Doc ID# 11 Affidavit of service-Nona Tobin as trustee of the Hansen Trust served via attorney John Thomson
2/17/202112Doc ID# 12 Affidavit of service-Nationstar
2/17/202113Doc ID# 13 Disclaimer of interest – Republic Services
3/8/202114Doc ID# 14 Nona Tobin’s Answer, Affirmative Defenses, And Counter-Claim vs. Red Rock Financial Services, Cross-Claims vs. Nationstar Mortgage LLC And Wells Fargo, N.A., And Motion For Sanctions vs. Red Rock Financial Services And Nationstar Mortgage LLC, and/or Nationstar Mortgage dba Mr. Cooper Pursuant To NRCP 11(b)(1)(2)(3) and/or(4), NRS 18.010(2), NRS 207.470(1), NRS 42.005
3/15/202115Doc ID# 15 Request for Judicial Notice
Nona Tobin’s Request for Judicial Notice of the Complete Official Clark County 2003-2021 Property Records for APN 191-13-811-052
3/22/202116Doc ID# 16 Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure for Nona Tobin an Individual
3/22/202117Doc ID# 17 Nona Tobin’s Third-Party Complaint 1. Abuse Of Process; 2. Racketeering (NRS207.360(9)(18) (29)(30) (35); NRS 207.390, NRS 207.400(1)(2); 3. Fraud NRS 205.330, NRS 205.360, NRS 205.372, NRS 205.377, NRS 205.395, NRS 205.405, NRS 111.175; 4. Restitution And Relief Requested Exceeds $15,000 5. Exemplary And Punitive Damages Pursuant To NRS 42.005, NRS 207.470(1) & (4) 6. Sanctions Pursuant To NRCP 11(b)(1-4); NRPC 3.1, 3.3, 3.4,3.5(b), 4.1, 4.4, 5.1, 5.2, 8.3, 8.4 vs. Steven B. Scow; Brody R. Wight; Joseph Hong; Melanie Morgan; David Ochoa; Brittany Wood
4/4/202118Doc ID# 18
Nona Tobin’s Request for Judicial Notice of Relevant Unadjudicated Civil Claims and Administrative Complaints
4/7/202119Doc ID# 19
Nona Tobin’s Request for Judicial Notice of the Nevada Revised Statutes, Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure, Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct and Sun City Anthem Governing Documents Germane To the Instant Action
4/9/202120Doc ID# 20 Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s Answer to Red Rock Financial Services’ Complaint for Interpleader (NRCP 22)
4/9/202121Doc ID# 21
Nona Tobin’s Request for Judicial Notice of NRCP 16.1 Disclosures and Subpoena Responses from Discovery in Case A-15-720032-C and Disputed Facts in the Court Record
4/12/202122Doc ID# 22 Nona Tobin’s Amended Motion for an Order to Distribute Interpleaded Proceeds with Interest to Sole Claimant Nona Tobin
4/14/202123Doc ID# 23 CNONCD Clerk’s Notice of Nonconforming Document (failed to say whether hearing was requested)
4/16/202124Doc ID# 24 Counter-Claimant & Cross-Claimant Nona Tobin’s Motion for Summary Judgment vs. Counter-Defendant Red Rock Financial Services and Cross- Defendants Nationstar Mortgage LLC & Wells Fargo, N.A. and Motion for Punitive Damages and Sanctions Pursuant to NRCP 11(b)(1)(2)(3) and/or(4), NRS 18.010(2), NRS 207.401(1) and/or NRS 42.005
4/16/202125Doc ID# 25 Clerk’s notice of hearing Tobin’s amended motion (22) for an order to distribute on 5/18/21
4/16/202126Doc ID# 26 Clerk’s Notice of Nonconforming Document and Curative Action
4/16/202127Doc ID# 27 Clerk’s 7:39AM notice of hearing Tobin MSJ (24) and petition for sanctions on 5/18/21
4/16/202128Doc ID# 28 Non-party Red Rock Financial Services, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaimant Nona Tobin’s Counterclaim and Petition for Sanctions (14)
29Doc ID# 29 Clerk’s notice of hearing on 5/18/21 Non-party Red Rock LLC’s untimely motion (28) to dismiss Tobin’s Counterclaim and Petition for Sanctions (14)
4/26/202130Doc ID# 30 Nona Tobin’s Opposition to Red Rock Motion to Dismiss (28) Tobin’s Counter-Claims and Motion for Sanctions (14) Pursuant to NRCP 11(b)(1)(2)(3) and/or (4), NRS 18.010(2), NRS 207.40(1), NRS 42.005
4/26/202131Doc ID# 31 Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s Limited Opposition to Defendant Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Order (22) to Distribute Interpleaded Proceeds
4/27/202132Doc ID# 32 Non-party Red Rock Financial Services, LLC’s rogue Joinder to Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s Limited Opposition (31) to Defendant Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Order to Distribute Interpleaded Proceeds (22)
4/29/202133Doc ID# 33 Red Rock Financial Services’ Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Motion for Summary Judgment (24)
5/3/202134Doc ID# 34 Wells Fargo, N.A. And Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s untimely Joinder To Red Rock Financial Services, LLC’s rogue Motion To Dismiss (28) Counter-claimant Nona Tobin’s Counter-claim And Petition For Sanctions (14)
5/4/202135Doc ID# 35 Nona Tobin’s Reply To Nationstar’s & Wells Fargo’s Opposition To Tobin’s Motion To Distribute Proceeds (22) And To Their Untimely Joinder (31) To Red Rock’s rogue Motion To Dismiss (28) And Tobin’s Reply To Support Tobin’s Motion For Summary Judgment Vs. Nationstar & Wells Fargo (24)
5/5/202136Doc ID# 36 Wells Fargo, N.A. And Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s Joinder To Red Rock Financial Services’ Opposition To Nona Tobin’s Motion For Summary Judgment (24)
5/9/202137Doc ID# 37 Nona Tobin’s Reply To Red Rock’s Joinder To Nationstar’s & Wells Fargo’s Opposition To Tobin’s Motion To Distribute Proceeds
5/9/202138Doc ID# 38 Nona Tobin’s Reply To Red Rock’s Opposition To Motion For Summary Judgment And Motion To Amend Third Party Complaint
5/11/202139Doc ID# 39 Non-Party Red Rock LLC’s Rogue Reply In Support Of Its Motion To Dismiss Counterclaimant Nona Tobin’s Counterclaim And Petition For Sanctions
6/22/202140Doc ID# 40 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE – JOHN THOMSON FOR NONA TOBIN
6/26/202141Doc ID# 41 STIPULATION AND ORDER – MOVE EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO 8/18/21by stipulation, changed manually by the court to 8/19/21
7/27/202142Doc ID# 42 NOTICE OF ENTRY OF STIPULATION AND ORDER – MOVE EVIDENTIARY HEARING TO 8/19/21
9/10/202143Doc ID# 43 “ORDER & JUDGMENT ON PLAINIFF (SIC) RED ROCK FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMANT NONA TOBIN’s COUNTERCLAIM AND PETITION FOR SANCTIONS AND DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIMANT NONA TOBIN’s MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT AND MOTION FOR SANCTIONS”
9/10/202144Doc ID# 44 Notice of Entry of Order & Judgment granting non-party Red Rock LLC’S rogue Motion to Dismiss Tobin’s Counterclaim, Petition For Sanctions And Tobin’s Motion For Summary Judgement against counter-defendant Red Rock
9/15/202145[45] Substitution of Attorneys for Tobin from John Thomson to Taylor Simpson, Suzanne Carver, P. Kerr Sterling
10/8/202146[46] Motion for Reconsideration
10/11/202147[47] Notice of Hearing Motion for Reconsideration
8/19/202148[48] Transcript of Proceedings 8/19/21
10/12/202149[49] Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Third-Party Claims Without Prejudice
10/13/202150Doc ID# 50 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice
10/13/202151Doc ID# 51 Notice of Entry of Order
10/21/202152Doc ID# 52 Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Motion for Reconsideration
10/22/202153Doc ID# 53 Non-party Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s rogue Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration of Order Dismissing Nona Tobin’s Counterclaim and Petition for Sanctions
10/29/202154Doc ID# 54 Tobin Reply in Support
11/9/202155Doc ID# 55Notice of Change of Hearing (from 10 AM to 8 AM
11/9/202156Doc ID# 5611/09/2021 Motion for Withdrawal
11/9/202157Doc ID# 57 DECLARATION OF NONA TOBIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO RECONSIDER ORDER ENTERED SEPTEMBER 10, 2021
11/10/202158Doc ID# 58 Ex Parte Application for an Order Shortening Time
11/10/202159Doc ID# 59 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
11/10/202160Doc ID# 60 Nona Tobin’s Three-Day Notice of Intent to Take Default vs. Wells Fargo, N.A. as to Tobin’s Cross-Claims Filed on March 8, 2021
11/10/202161Doc ID# 61 Notice of Intent to Take Nationstar’s Default
11/11/202162Doc ID# 62 Motion to Withdraw As Counsel
11/12/202163Doc ID# 63 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
11/14/202164Doc ID# 64 Declaration
11/15/202165Doc ID# 65 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
11/15/202166Doc ID# 66 Motion to Strike
11/15/202167Doc ID# 67 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
11/17/202168Doc ID# 68 Order to Withdraw as Attorney of Record
11/19/202169Doc ID# 69 Notice of Entry of Order
11/30/202170Doc ID# 70
Order Clarifying Sept. 10th, 2021 Order and Mooting Notice of Default and Motion to Strike
11/30/202171Doc ID# 71
Order Denying Nona Tobin’s Motion to Reconsider of Order Dismissing Nona Tobin’s Counterclaim and Petition for Sanctions and Defendant/Counterclaimant Nona Tobin’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion for Sanctions
11/30/202172Doc ID# 72 Notice of Entry of Order Clarifying September 10, 2021 Order And Mooting Notice of Default and Motion to Strike
11/30/202173Doc ID# 73 Denial of Motion to Reconsider
11/16/202174Doc ID# 74 Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Defendant/ Counterclaimant’s Motion for Reconsideration 11/16/21
12/14/202175Doc ID# 75 Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing to Set Aside Orders and for Sanctions Pursuant to NRCP 60(B)(3) and (D)(3), NRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60 (1) and (3)
12/14/202176Doc ID# 76 Notice of Hearing
12/28/2177Doc ID# 77 Non-party Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s rogue Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing to Set Aside September 10, 2021 Order and November 30, 2021 Orders Pursuant to NRCP 60(b)(3) (Fraud) and NRCP 60 (d)(3) (Fraud on the Court) and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Pursuant to EDCR 7.60(b)(1) and (3), NRS 18.010(2); and, Countermotion for Abuse of Process; For a Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
12/29/202178Doc ID# 78 Notice of Appearance “Aaron D. Lancaster, Esq., of Troutman Pepper LLP, will appear as Counsel for Defendant, Wells
Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC.” No IAFD. No SUBT. No Signature from Wells Fargo, Nationstar, or Akerman. “Gary Schnitzer, of Kravitz Schnitzer Johnson Watson & Zeppenfeld, Chtd., the office of which is located within the State of Nevada at 8985 S. EasternAvenue, Suite 200, Las Vegas, Nevada 89123, has agreed to serve as the Designated Attorney forservice of papers, process, or pleadings required to be served on the attorney, Aaron D. Lancaster, Esq., including service by hand delivery or facsimile transmission, as Troutman Pepper LLP does not maintain an office in the State of Nevada.”
12/29/202179Doc ID# 79 Wells Fargo and Nationistar’s Joinder to Defendant Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing to Set Aside September 10, 2021 Order and November 30, 2021 Orders Pursuant to NRCP 60 (b)(3) (Fraud) and NRCP 60 (b)(3) (Fraud on the Court) and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Pursuant to EDCR 7.60 (1) and (3) NRS 18.010 (2); and Countermotion for Abuse of Process; for a Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
1/10/202280Doc ID# 80 Nona Tobin’s Reply to Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Motion for an Evidentiary Hearing to Set Aside September 10, 2021 Order and November 30, 2021 Orders Pursuant to NRCP 60(b)(3) (Fraud) and NRCP 60(b)(3) (Fraud on the Court) and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Cots Pursuant to EDCR 7.60(1) and (3), NRS 18.010(2); and, Countermotion for Abuse of Process for a Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
1/10/202281Doc ID# 81 Nona Tobin’s Reply To Nationstar’s And Wells Fargo’s Joinder And Countermotions For Attorney Fees And A Vexatious Litigant Order
1/11/202282Doc ID# 82 Notice of Change of Hearing
1/14/202283Doc ID# 83 Order Granting Akerman s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC
1/19/202284Doc ID# 84 Notice of Entry of Order Granting Akerman s Motion to Withdraw as Counsel for Wells Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC
1/19/202285Doc ID# 85 Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: 01/19/22
4/26/202286Doc ID# 86 Notice of Appearance No IAFD. No SUBT. No authorization by nationstar or Wells Fargo. Aaron Lancater notices begin “VANESSA M. TURLEY, of Troutman Pepper LLP, is admitted and authorized to practice in this Court, and will appear as Counsel for Defendant, Wells
Fargo, N.A. and Nationstar Mortgage LLC.”
5/25/202288Doc ID# 88 Order Denying Nona Tobin’s Motion For An Evidentiary Hearing To Set Aside 9/10/21 Order And 11/30/21 Orders Pursuant To NRCP 60(b)(3)(Fraud) And NRCP 60(d)(3)(Fraud On The Court) And Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Costs Pursuant To EDCR 7.60(1) And (3), NRS 18.010(2); And, Denying non-party Red Rock LLC’s 12/28/21 Countermotions For Abuse Of Process and Denying non-party Red Rock LLC’s motion For A Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin And denying For Attorney Fees And Costs
5/25/202289[89] Notice of Entry of Order Denying Nona Tobin’s Motion For An Evidentiary Hearing To Set Aside 9/10/21 Order And 11/30/21 Orders Pursuant To NRCP 60(b)(3)(Fraud) And NRCP 60(d)(3)(Fraud On The Court) And Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Costs Pursuant To EDCR 7.60(1) And (3), NRS 18.010(2); And, Denying non-party Red Rock LLC’s 12/28/21 Countermotions For Abuse Of Process and Denying non-party Red Rock LLC’s motion For A Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin And denying For Attorney Fees And Costs
5/30/202290[90] Second Amended Motion for an Order to Distribute Interpleaded Funds with Interest to Sole Claimant Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to NRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60(b)(1) and (3) and Motion to Correct Nunc Pro Tunc Notices of Entry of Orders Entered on November 30, 2021 and May 25, 2022
5/30/202291Doc ID# 91
Exhibits To Second Amended Motion For An Order To Distribute Interpleaded Funds With Interest To Sole Claimant Nona Tobin And Motion For Attorney Fees And Costs Pursuant To NRS18.010(2) And EDCR7.60(b)(1) And (3) And Motion To Correct Nunc Pro Tunc Notices Of Entry Of Orders Entered On 11/30/21 And 5/25/22
5/31/202292Doc ID# 92
Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
6/13/202293Doc ID# 93
Non-party Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s Opposition to Nona Tobin’s Second Amended Motion for An Order to Distribute Interpleaded Funds With Interest to Sole Claimant Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant toNRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60(b)(1) and (3) and Motion to Correct Nunc Pro Tunc Notices of Entry of Orders Entered on November 30, 2021 and May 25, 2022; and Renewed Countermotion for Abuse of Process; For a Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
6/21/202294Doc ID# 94
Reply To Non-Party Red Rock LLC’s Opposition To Tobin’s Second Amended Motion For An Order To Distribute Interpleaded Funds With Interest To Sole Claimant Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to NRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60(B)(1) and (3)
6/22/202295Doc ID# 95
Nona Tobin’s Reply To Non-Party Opposition To Motion To Correct Notices Of Entry Of Three Orders
6/27/202296Doc ID# 96
Reponse to Non-Party Red Rock Financial Services, LLC’s Countermotion for a Restrictive Vexatious Litigant Order Against Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs and Nona Tobins Counter-Motion to Adopt Tobins Proposed Final Judgment Order
6/30/202297Doc ID# 97
Notice of Appellate Decision
07/07/2022 Motion (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Peterson, Jessica K.)
8/29/202298Doc ID# 98
Notice Of Tobin Petition For Writ Of Prohibition And Or Mandamus
9/23/202299Doc ID# 99
Amended Notice of the Filing of a NRAP 40 Motion for Rehearing of Petition for a Writ of Prohibition and/or Mandamus
10/5/2022100Doc ID# 100
Motion for Rehearing Petition for Writ of Prohibition and /or Mandamus
11/28/2022101Doc ID# 101
Notice Of NRAP 40a Petition For En Banc Reconsideration 85251
12/19/2022102Doc ID# 102
Request for Judicial Notice Verified Complaints of Attorney Misconduct filed with the State Bar of Nevada vs. Brittany Wood
12/19/2022103Doc ID# 103
Tobin Motin For An Order To Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not Be Forwarded To The State Bar f Nevada
12/19/2022104Doc ID# 104
Request for Judicial Notice Verified Complaint of Attorney Misconduct Filed With The State Bar of Nevada Vs. Steven Scow
12/19/2022105Doc ID# 105
Request for Judicial Notice Verified Complaints of Attorney Misconduct Filed with the State Bar of Nevada vs. Melanie Morgan, Esq. (SBN 8215), Akerman, LLP; and Wright, Finlay, Zak, LLP, and Draft Alternative Civil Action
12/19/2022106Doc ID# 106
Request for Judicial Notice Verified Complaint of Attorney Misconduct Filed With The State Bar of Nevada Vs. Joseph Y. Hong
12/19/2022107Doc ID# 107
Request for Judicial Notice Verified Complaints of Attorney Misconduct Filed With The State Bar of Nevada Vs. David Ochoa, Esq. (SBN 10414) and Adam Clarkson, Esq.
12/20/2022108Doc ID# 108
Corrected Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not be Forwarded to the State Bar
12/20/2022109Doc ID# 109 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
12/20/2022110Doc ID# 110 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
12/20/2022111Doc ID# 111 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing
1/3/20231121/3/23 Motion Doc ID# 112
1) Motion to Withdraw Tobin’s Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not Be Forwarded to the State Bar And 2) Motion to Withdraw Tobin’s Counter-Claims and Cross-Claims vs. Red Rock, Nationstar and Wells Fargo 3) Motion to Modify Grounds for Tobin’s Petitions for Sanctions vs. Red rock and Nationstar to Include NRS 357.040(1(a),(b),(i), and NRS 199.210, NRS 205.0824 and NRS 205.0833, and NRS 41.1395 And 4) Motion to Adopt Tobin’s Proposed Final Judgment Order
1/3/2023113Doc ID# 113
Response to Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not Be Forwarded to the State Bar
1/6/20231141/6/23 Clerk’s Notice of Hearing Doc ID# 114
1/9/202311501/09/2023 Order Doc ID# 115
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Nona Tobin’s Second Amended Motion for an Order to Distribute Interpleaded Funds with Interest to Sole Claimant Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to NRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60(b)(1) and (3) and Motin to Correct Nunc Pro Tunc Notices of Entry of Orders Entered on November 30 2021 and May 25 2022 and Granting in Part Red Rock Financial Services’ Countermotion for Abuse of Process; for a Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
1/10/2023116Notice of Entry of Order Doc ID# 116
1/16/2023117Doc ID# 117
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Nona Tobin’s Second Amended Motion for an Order to Distribute Interpleaded Funds with Interest to Sole Claimant Nona Tobin and Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs Pursuant to NRS 18.010(2) and EDCR 7.60(b)(1) and (3) and Motion to Correct Nunc Pro Tunc Notices of Entry of Orders Entered on November 30 2021 and May 25 2022 and Granting in Part Red Rock Financial Services’ Countermotion for Abuse of Process; for a Vexatious Litigant Restrictive Order Against Nona Tobin and for Attorney Fees and Costs
1/17/2023118Doc ID# 118
Notice of Entry of Corrected 1/9/23 Order amended solely to correct the 1/9/23 order to state that Tobin had responded, refused to sign for the reasons identified in the opposition attached to the corrected order.
1/17/2023119Doc ID# 119
Red Rock Financial Services’ Response/Opposition to (1) Motion to Withdraw Tobins Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not be Forwarded to the State Bar; (2) Motion to Withdraw Tobins Counter-Claims and Cross-Claims vs. Red Rock, Nationstar and Wells Fargo; (3) Motion to Modify Grounds for Tobins Petitions for Sanctions vs. Red Rock and Nationstar to include NRS 357.0401(a), (b), (i) and NRS 199.210, NRS 205.0824 and NRS 205.0833, and NRS 41.1395; and (4) Motion to Adopt Tobins Proposed Final Judgment Order
1/23/2023120Doc ID# 120
Tobin 1/23/23 Motion to Reconsider 1/16/23 Order and Renewed Motion to Strike Non-Party Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s Rogue Filings
1/24/2023121Doc ID# 121
Clerks’ Notice of Hearing
1/24/2023122Doc ID# 122
Wells Fargo and Nationstar’s Joinder to Red Rock Financial Services’ Response//Opposition to (1) Motion to Withdraw Tobin’s Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should Not Be Forwarded to The State Bar; (2) Motion to WIthdraw Tobin’s Petitions For Sanctions VS. Red Rock, Nationstar to Include NRS 357.0401(A), (B), (I) and NRS 199.210, NRS 205.0824 and NRS 205.0833, and NRS 41.1395; and (4) Motion to Adopt Tobin’s Proposed Final Judgment Order
1/31/2023123Doc ID# 123
Tobin’s Reply to Red Rock’s Opposition to Tobin’s Four 1/03/23 Motions to Amend Final Order
2/2/2023124Doc ID# 124 Declaration
Declaration of Steven B. Scow in Support of Attorneys’ Fees Awarded to Red Rock Financial Services
2/2/2023125Doc ID# 125 Reply to Opposition
Tobin’s Reply to Nationstar’s Opposition and Vexatious Litigant Motion
2/12/2023126Doc ID# 126 Opposition to Motion
Tobin Opposition To Scow Declaration ISO Attorney Fees
2/16/2023127Doc ID# 127 Memorandum of Costs and Disbursements
Red Rock Financial Services’ Memorandum of Costs and Disbursements as Supplement to Declaration of Steven B. Scow
2/20/2023128Doc ID# 128 Reply to Opposition
Tobin Reply in Opposition to Red Rock 2/16/23 Memo of Fees and Costs
3/3/2023129Doc ID# 129 Court Recorders Invoice for Transcript Ex parte 2/2/23 hearing
2/2/2023 recording fee and transcript
3/3/2023130Doc ID# 130 Recorders Transcript of 2/2/23 ex parte unnoticed Hearing added to court record on 3/3/23
3/28/2023131Order Declaring Nona Tobin a Vexatious Litigant, Order Denying Defendant Nona Tobin’s: (1) Motion to Withdraw Tobin’s Motion for Order to Show Cause why Written Findings of Attorney Misconduct Should no be Forwarded to the State Bar; (2) Moton to Withdraw Tobin’s Counter- Claims and Cross-Claims vs Red Rock, Nationstar and Wells Fargo/ (3) Motion to Modify Grounds for Tobin’s Petitions for Sanctions vs Red Rock and Nationstar to Include NRS 357.404(1)(A), and NRS 199.210, NRS 205.0824 and NRS 205.0833, and NRS 41.1395 and (4) Motion to Adopt Tobin’s Proposed Final Judgment Order and Order Denying Defendant Nona Tobin’s: Motion to Reconsider 1/16/23 Order and Renewed Motion to Strike Non-Party Red Rock Financial Services LLC’s Rogue Filings
3/28/2023132Doc ID# 132
Notice of Entry of Order
4/1/23Register of Actions

Black letter Nevada law: Exploitation of older or vulnerable persons

NRS 41.1395  Action for damages for injury or loss suffered by older or vulnerable person from abuse, neglect or exploitation; double damages; attorney’s fees and costs.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, if an older person or a vulnerable person suffers a personal injury or death that is caused by abuse or neglect or suffers a loss of money or property caused by exploitation, the person who caused the injury, death or loss is liable to the older person or vulnerable person for two times the actual damages incurred by the older person or vulnerable person.

      2.  If it is established by a preponderance of the evidence that a person who is liable for damages pursuant to this section acted with recklessness, oppression, fraud or malice, the court shall order the person to pay the attorney’s fees and costs of the person who initiated the lawsuit.

      3.  The provisions of this section do not apply to a person who caused injury, death or loss to a vulnerable person if the person did not know or have reason to know that the harmed person was a vulnerable person.

      4.  For the purposes of this section:

      (a) “Abuse” means willful and unjustified:

             (1) Infliction of pain, injury or mental anguish; or

             (2) Deprivation of food, shelter, clothing or services which are necessary to maintain the physical or mental health of an older person or a vulnerable person.

      (b) “Exploitation” means any act taken by a person who has the trust and confidence of an older person or a vulnerable person or any use of the power of attorney or guardianship of an older person or a vulnerable person to:

             (1) Obtain control, through deception, intimidation or undue influence, over the money, assets or property of the older person or vulnerable person with the intention of permanently depriving the older person or vulnerable person of the ownership, use, benefit or possession of that person’s money, assets or property; or

             (2) Convert money, assets or property of the older person with the intention of permanently depriving the older person or vulnerable person of the ownership, use, benefit or possession of that person’s money, assets or property.

Ê As used in this paragraph, “undue influence” does not include the normal influence that one member of a family has over another.

      (c) “Neglect” means the failure of a person who has assumed legal responsibility or a contractual obligation for caring for an older person or a vulnerable person, or who has voluntarily assumed responsibility for such a person’s care, to provide food, shelter, clothing or services within the scope of the person’s responsibility or obligation, which are necessary to maintain the physical or mental health of the older person or vulnerable person. For the purposes of this paragraph, a person voluntarily assumes responsibility to provide care for an older or vulnerable person only to the extent that the person has expressly acknowledged the person’s responsibility to provide such care.

      (d) “Older person” means a person who is 60 years of age or older.

      (e) “Vulnerable person” means a person who:

             (1) Has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of the person; and

             (2) Has a medical or psychological record of the impairment or is otherwise regarded as having the impairment.

Ê The term includes, without limitation, a person who has an intellectual disability, a person who has a severe learning disability, a person who suffers from a severe mental or emotional illness or a person who suffers from a terminal or catastrophic illness or injury.

      (Added to NRS by 1997, 3344; A 2003, 4922013, 681)

NRS 41.1395

Cause of Action: Fraud

The Elements of fraud apply to all the defendants being named in case A-21-828840-C that were opposing counsels to Nona Tobin in Nevada district court cases related to a dispute over the title of 2763 White Sage that was sold at an HOA foreclosure sale in 2014, i.e., in cases A-21-828840-C, A-19-799890-C, A-16-73-0078-C, and A-15-720032-C.

The elements of the cause of action of Fraud on the Court:

1. Defendant makes a false representation as to a past or existing fact.

2. With knowledge or belief by defendant that representation is false or that defendant lacks sufficient basis of information to make the representation;

3. Defendant intended to induce the Court to act in reliance on the representation;

4. Justifiable reliance upon the representation by the Court;

5. Causation and damages to plaintiff Nona Tobin as a result of the Court’s relying on misrepresentation; and

6. Must be proved by clear and convincing evidence and be pled with specificity.

Relevant Nevada court cases

NEVADA JURY INSTRUCTIONS 9.01; 

NRCP 9;

(b) Fraud or Mistake; Conditions of Mind.  In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must state with particularity the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person’s mind may be alleged generally

NRCP 9(b)

Jordan v. State ex rel. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles & Pub. Safety, 121 Nev. 44, 75, 110 P.3d 30, 51 (2005); 

J.A. Jones Constr. Co. v. Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc., 120 Nev. 277, 89 P.3d 1009 (2004); 

Barmettler v. Reno Air, Inc., 14 Nev. 441, 956 P.2d 1382 (1998); 

Blanchard v. Blanchard, 108 Nev. 908 (1992);  

Bulbman, Inc. v. Nev. Bell, 108 Nev. 105, 111, 825 P.2d 588, 592 (1992); 

Albert H. Wohlers & Co. v. Bartgis, 114 Nev. 1249, 1260, 969 P.2d 949, 957 (1998);  

Sanguinetti v. Strecker, 94 Nev. 200, 206, 577 P.2d 404, 408 (1978); 

Lubbe v. Barba, 91 Nev. 596, 541 P.2d 115 (1975).

Why Alternate Dispute Resolution?

Litigation is expensive and wasteful

There are tons of reasons why filing a lawsuit is not the most effective way to resolve disputes. So, Sun City Anthem, and probably all other Del Webb HOAs, have clauses in their CC&Rs to require alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures, using a trained, neutral mediator, prior to a court having jurisdiction over ordering who is the winner and who is the loser.

Sun City Anthem’s CC&Rs XVI: Limits on Litigation

All “BOUND PARTIES” must use ADR

Sandy Seddon, Adam Clarkson, David Ochoa (the Sun City Anthem attorney Clarkson and Seddon have used as an attack dog in their relentless retaliation against me for being a whistleblower), every individual member of the HOA Board and the SCA Board as a whole, all HOA homeowners, all bloggers, are “bound parties” even if they think it doesn’t apply to them because they are above the law.

All claims are covered unless exempted here

Foundation Assisting Seniors weren’t given access to ADR before being kicked out

Seddon used the HOA attorney to sue FAS

Sandy Seddon has used Adam Clarkson to forward her own personal agenda on many occasions. The crap they pulled on Favil West and the Foundation Assisting Seniors would never have happened if they had not violated their fiduciary duty to the homeowners-at-large AND conspired with Rex Weddle to assign Sandy Seddon the role of mediator.

Sandy Seddon had no training or experience as a mediator and was certainly not neutral. None of the steps mandated by our CC&Rs XVI were provided to Favil West and the Foundation Assisting Seniors.

Seddon and Weddle, both “Bound Parties” under the CC&Rs simply chose to abuse the authority of their positions to inappropriately use the HOA’s attorney to deprive Favil West and the Foundation Assisting Seniors, also both “Bound Parties” under the CC&Rs, of their rights to a good faith attempt to resolve their differences without litigation.

How Seddon used the HOA attorneys to screw me over the same way she nailed FAS

Most of you all know the story about how Sun City Anthem’s debt collector sold the house I inherited from Bruce Hansen without notice, but here’s a short video summary.

The HOA attorney forced me to litigate over Bruce’s house. I got no access to ADR

I had settlement talks booked and Seddon switched attorneys

David Ochoa rejected my 2017 offer to settle at no cost to Sun City Anthem or myself

What happened after Seddon’s attack dog blocked my access to ADR?

What did Seddon and Clarkson do after I was elected to the Board and I was a party to the litigation I was forced into?

They unlawfully removed me from my elected Board seat because had filed complaints against them, but lied and defamed me to cover it up.

Kicking me off the Board for being a whistleblower disenfranchised the 2,001 Sun City anthem homeowners who voted for me. There is no legal authority whatsoever for this action, but they got away with it because Adam Clarkson is corrupt and should be disbarred.

Seddon & Weddle also used the HOA attorney to obstruct the 2017 recall election

Kicking me off the Board was necessary to prevent the recall from succeeding

There were recall petitions against four of the seven members of the Board. The Election Committee had a Charter that defined their duties to conduct all of our HOA Board elections, including the removal elections that would be held if enough signatures were collected.

I was the Board liaison to the Election Committee, and I filed a request to the Ombudsman to provide oversight of the signature collection and the removal election since Sandy Seddon, lori Martin, Rex Weddle, and David Berman were interfering in the process and depriving owners of their rights under our governing documents and under Nevada law.

Link to PDF of my 7/24/17 request for Ombudsman oversight of the recall process

I was one of the three members of the Board who could legally still operate the association if the NRS 116.31036 removal election resulted in the four being removed.

So naturally they had to get rid of me without a removal election

Link to PDF of Clarkson’s 8/24/17 letter removing me from my elected Board seat

Response to demand letters?

Here are links to the PDFs of my complaints: notices of intent to file complaints that were discussed by the Board at the 8/24/17 executive session

8/11/17 notice of intent to file a form 514a complaint against a community manager.

Below is page 1 of 23 pages in my complaint.

8/16/17 notice of intent to file an ethics complaint against Adam Clarkson
8/24/17 executive session board book edited exclusively for me

Note that the two “demand letters” in the book and on the 8/24/17 closed session agenda are the same ones linked above vs. Seddon and Clarkson.

Here are the minutes Seddon provided of the 8/24/17 closed Board meeting where 6 of the 7 Directors authorized Clarkson to remove me without an NRS 116.311036 removal election

How is Seddon still using the HOA attorney to screw me over for bitching about her pay?

See the blog “No 2021 HOA Board Election

How the crooks steal HOA houses

HOAsuperPriorityLien.com

Click on the link above to get to the UNLV Lied Institute for Real Estate and Nevada Assocaiation of Realtors 2017 study regarding how HOA foreclosures have depressed the Nevada real estate markets by over $1 billion in lost value.

In short, every home in an HOA loses 1.7% of value when the HOA forecloses on a property for delinquent assessments.

Wouldn’t it make sense for the owners in an HOA to buy a property or have a bake sale to kep a delinquent owner afloat rather than lose value on your home because some assessments are delinquent?

The reason that doesn’t happen is because the HOA debt collectors have a GIANT scam going where they sell these houses in secret to their connected speculators and not only the person who loses his or her home gets screwed, but everybody in the HOA pays for the debt collector and the speculator to get rich.

What is a super-priority lien?

HOA owners in 22 states are at risk of this scam

Mortgage-backed securities screwed us all

HOA foreclosures can occur when the HOA auctions off houses to collect unpaid assessments. Nevada law protects HOAs to the extent that nine months of delinquent assessments have “super priority” over the first security interest of a lender. 

This has been a very big deal since the economic meltdown in 2008 caused property values to come crashing down.

Lots of people started defaulting on their mortgages when balloon payments and/or rate adjustments came due on houses that were “underwater” with loan balances exceeding what they could sell the house for.

Remember all the bank-owned houses around that the banks were not maintaining?

The banks also weren’t paying HOA dues, and so whole communities or condominium projects failed and went bankrupt.

The banks are definitely villains in this scenario. 

The HOA receives owner assessments in order to have sufficient funds to operate and reserve, and the banks weren’t paying and they weren’t taking care of the properties, and in many cases, they wouldn’t or couldn’t sell them.

By “couldn’t sell”, I mean that there was a lot of foreclosure fraud going on because it was extremely difficult to establish who actually was entitled to ownership of the debt.

So many bank failures and mergers caused part of the confusion.

Remember Wachovia, Washington Mutual, Countrywide Home Loans?

All gone.

A second and even bigger problem was Wall Street’s greedy and fraudulent securitization of high-risk adjustable mortgages into incomprehensible “synthetic derivatives”. By slicing and dicing individual mortgages into such products as collateralized debt swaps got the whole mortgage securities market in the world further and further away from knowing who owned any particular loan. These financial instruments were so complex, nobody expected them all to start failing at once. (The movie, “The Big Short” explains all this in a very funny and accessible fashion.) Anyway, the banks, being “too big to fail” and all, were bailed out. Remember the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)?

So, as I’m telling you all this, don’t ever feel sorry for the banks. No matter how crooked they were. No matter how badly they screwed over poor people by putting them into loans they couldn’t afford or even understand, our tax dollars bailed them out and nobody went to jail for crashing the world economy.

Back to what this has to do with HOAs

HOAs depend on assessments for the money needed to maintain the quality of the common areas and to operate facilities and programs that define the lifestyle people bought into. So the state law gives the HOA the right to foreclose ahead of the bank for nine months of assessments. This started happening a lot not just because the owners walked away from their mortgages, but because the banks were really slow to foreclose because in lot of cases they couldn’t figure out who owned the loan and nobody actually had the original note (I.O.U.)

So the banks decided that they better gin up some phoney ownership papers, and there were literally millions of home loans in this limbo. So many that the banks started using “robo-signers”, low level employees who would sign documents using phony titles to pretend they are bank officials authorized to assign the loan, like MERS Secretary or Vice-President. this fraudulent scheme was carried out for quite a while by some well known entities, like Bank of America, Wells Fargo, etc. Since MERS is a privatized (bank-owned) way to avoid recording of rapidly-shifting property transfers or loan assignments, they got away with it a lot particularly in Nevada which was the hardest hit state in the nation.

In 2011, Total Mortgage.com blog reported:

The housing market in Nevada is so bad, that according to Corelogic’s 3rd Quarter Negative Equity Report, as of November, 58.3% of homes with mortgages in Nevada are underwater, while 4.8% have near negative equity.  Total home equity in Nevada among homeowners with mortgages is less than -$10.3 billion, making the average loan-to-value ratio in the state 110.2%.  Nevada is the only state that has a net negative home equity.

As a result of this disaster, Nevada has been one of the most aggressive states in fighting mortgage abuses.  In October, Nevada passed a tough anti-foreclosure law that makes it a felony for a lender, servicer or trustee to make false representations or claims over a title.  In the wake of this law, foreclosures in Nevada plummeted.

Mortgage fraud by the banks and loan servicing companies was slowed even further by a 2012 $25 Bllion settlement between B of A, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Loan Services and Wells Fargo involving 49 states Attorney Generals and the Justice Dept.

In Nevada, strong anti-foreclosure fraud legislation went into effect in 2011,  The bank foreclosure came to a slamming halt once the (real) bank officials could be charged with a class D felony if they signed false affidavits to reassign the loan in the official county records. Bank foreclosures dropped 88% in the month following the passage of the anti-foreclosure law (October 2011), according to the Wall street Journal.

So, the good news was that banks couldn’t foreclose on homes they didn’t actually own. The bad news is that the majority of those bank-owned properties were in one of the over 2,500 HOAs in Nevada so delinquent assessments began piling up.

What happened to the HOAs that weren’t getting paid assessments for all these bank-owned properties? What happened to the property values as the number of distressed properties increased? I imagine some HOAs went into bankruptcy. Others HOAs passed the cost of the vacant properties over to assessment increases to the remaining owners. Some HOAs really upped the speed at which they foreclosed on properties themselves so they wouldn’t be left holding the bag.

In SFR Investments Pool 1  v. US Bank, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (9/19/14), the Nevada Supreme Court apparently fed up with the banks’ refusal to pay the HOA assessments while they were holding the title, ruled that bank’s security interest was extinguished in its entirety by an HOA foreclosure sale.   Big, big loss for the lenders. Big win for the HOAs? Of course not. the big winner was the buyer at the HOA foreclosure sale who (as in this Southern Highlands case) bought the house for under $10,000 and wiped out the banks’ nearly $900,000 loan.

Wow! Big, big win for buyers at HOA foreclosure sales. So, what’s wrong with that? Aren’t get rich quick schemes something we all secretly hope will fall in our laps? Are we just jealous that someone other than us got a fantastic windfall at the expense of the bank? Well, maybe there’s some of that, but what’s wrong with that is the seeds of corruption have been sown.

Let’s not forget what happens when a loophole or a drastic shift in market conditions creates an opportunity to make a huge profits for investing very little and doing very little work. Obviously, every flim-flam man comes out of the woodwork. But worse, otherwise honest people get tempted by get-rich quick schemes and start crossing ethical boundaries. Fiduciaries, like HOA managing agents, HOA debt collectors and HOA attorneys get dollar signs in their eyes and forget whose interest (HOA homeowners) they are legally required to protect. And never underestimate how hard the banks will fight to keep their ill-gotten gains from being stolen by another opportunistic thief.

So, where does that leave HOAs and HOA homeowners? You guessed it. Holding the bag. Even though the mortgage crisis is over and the Las Vegas valley housing market is recovering, there are huge residual financial impacts affecting SCA and other Nevada HOAs.

HOAs are stuck in the middle of expensive legal battles between the banks and the buyers at HOA sales. Worse, HOAs are accountable for wrongdoing of HOA managing agents, debt collectors and attorneys, when they, usually unbeknownst to the Board, took illegal shortcuts to make a speedy sale or took profits unlawfully.

  • There are literally thousands of HOA foreclosure cases in the state and federal courts in Nevada. (I think SCA has five active cases) and thousands, if not millions, of attorneys’ fees are racking up.
  • Cases filed in state court are bound by the rulings of the Nevada Supreme Court that recently reaffirmed its decision that HOA foreclosures extinguishes the lender’s security interest.
  • make their determination of the Federal court
  • Most of these cases involve the buyer at the HOA sale suing to get “quiet title” from the bank, but the HOA  named because the sale was conducted under the legal authority of the HOA.

In 2016, I wrote a letter to the Review-Journal Editor, in response to the R-J September 11, 2016 editorial about how unfair the HOAs were to confiscate the bank’s property without due process. My main point was the banks don’t own the property unless they legally foreclose. It’s the homeowner who loses when the HOA forecloses without proper notice or when the bank takes possession without foreclosing.

But what if the method defined in NRS 116 actually pushes costs to ALL HOA owners that can be orders of magnitude greater than absorbing or forgiving more the bad debts ?

According to a May 2017 study by the Association of Realtors and UNLV LIED Institute showed that HOA foreclosures reduced the value of ALL Nevada homes by 1.7%, and that the controversy over HOA’s super-priority lien status has decreased the willingness of lenders to lend for the purchase of homes in HOAs.

Since 57 % of Nevada homes are in 3,000+ HOAs, this is a very big deal. Some consider that this is a factor in Las Vegas’ sluggishness in returning to property values that existed before the economic meltdown that occurred a decade ago when mortgage-backed securities became worthless seemingly overnight.

The Reno paper published an article about the study, but the Las Vegas Review Journal did not.

On Tyranny

It’s hard to subvert a rule-of-law state without lawyers or to hold show trials without judges.

Timothy Snyder On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century – Lesson 5 “Remember professional ethics.”

This statement is very meaningful to me given what Sun City Anthem’s unscrupulous, self-serving lawyers have done to subvert the rule of law in our community.

Today is my 17th anniversary as an owner

I moved into my newly built house at 2664 Olivia Heights on February 20, 2004.

I have been a Sun City Anthem homeowner in good standing with only one $25 fine assessed for paying my 7/1/12-9/30/12 $275/ quarterly assessments on 8/17/12 instead of before 7/31/12.

I was elected to the HOA Board in 2017

I applied to run for the Board again this year

So instead of the rule of law governing our democratic Board elections…

Am I the only Board candidate who has been covertly “vetted” out of the race by persons unknown?

Sandy Seddon used the HOA attorney to keep her big fat unjustified pay check

SCA’s attorney billed owners for “legal letters” to stop me & channel 13 from knowing how much Seddon is paid.

The Clarkson Law Group & Sandy Seddon should both be fired for their long-term pattern of acting in their own self-interest instead of as fiduciaries.

Please, Your Honor, don’t treat me like Sheriff NRED

Sophia begs for help, but the system was against her.

This Jim Crow Southern Sheriff restored his personal, and a still popular, version of law and order. Sheriff Jim Crow did not “protect and serve”. Sheriff Jim Crow pistol-whipped Sophia as she faced the bigoted, bloodthirsty mob alone, begging fruitlessly for protection from the man sworn to provide it.

In this 2018 www.SCAstrong.com blog, I was complaining about the systemic bias of the Nevada Ombudsman for Owners in Common-Interest Communities whose record is “resolving” homeowners’ grievances 100% against them.

On my new YouTube channel, Judicial Jiu-Jitsu, I expand my expose of systemic bias to include the Nevada state courts. I have been Sophia for the past four years.

An individual, whether represented or not, facing a mob of attorneys representing powerful and corrupt, banks, and debt collectors in Nevada state courts, has Sophie’s chance of prevailing.

Don’t we all deserve equal protection by the rule of law?

Please, Sheriff NRED, don’t treat me like Sophia

I just have to ask you, personally,

and I am speaking to you, Nevada State CIC Compliance Officials -NRED Administrator Chandra, Attorney Briggs, Ombudsman Foger, Compliance Chief Wheaton, and Compliance Audit Investigator II Pitch,

To think about it.
How do you get a 100% rejection rate of SCA homeowner grievances if there is a level playing field?
 
Are you aligned with your mission statement?
 
Or
are you “keeping the peace” by enabling an abusive culture?

I invite you to consider the possibility that you have an institutional blind spot that creates a consistent bias against SCA homeowners – and maybe, against all Nevada HOA homeowners, that’s like putting a thumb on the scales in favor of HOA vendors or a powerful few.

Sheriff Jim Crow still has his way to do it

The Jim Crow Southern Sheriff restored his personal, and a still popular, version of law and order by pistol-whipping Sophia as she faced the bigoted, bloodthirsty mob alone, begging fruitlessly for protection from the man sworn to provide it.

What are you doing, Sheriff NRED?

What are you doing, Your Honor?