Nevada quiet title case law supports voiding the sale of 2763 White Sage

Jimijack & Nationstar did not meet their burden of proof

(“We first hold that each party in a quiet title action has the burden of demonstrating superior title in himself or herself.”)

Res. Grp., LLC v. Nev. Ass’n Servs., Inc., 437 P.3d 154, 156 (Nev. 2019) 

Facts

  1. Jimijack did not have an admissible deed.
  2. Nationstar was never the beneficial owner of the Hansen 7/22/04 deed of trust.

The foreclosure sale was void and could not remove Tobin’s title rights

A foreclosure sale generally terminates a party’s legal title to the property. See Bldg. Energetix Corp. v. EHE, LP,129 Nev. 78, 86294 P.3d 1228, 1234 (2013) ; Charmicor, Inc. v. Bradshaw Fin. Co.,92 Nev. 310, 313550 P.2d 413, 415 (1976). This general rule is subject to certain limited exceptions, such as where the sale is void. See Energetix , 129 Nev. at 86294 P.3d at 1234 (noting that a lack of substantial compliance with the relevant statutes and a lack of proper notice are exceptions to the general rule); see also Bank of Am., N.A. v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC, 134 Nev. ––––, ––––, 427 P.3d 113, 121 (2018), as amended on denial of reh’g (2018) (holding that a foreclosure sale on a lien is void where that lien has been satisfied prior to the sale “as the lien is no longer in default”); Henke v. First S. Props., Inc.,586 S.W.2d 617, 619-20 (Tex. Civ. App. 1979) (concluding that the payment of past-due installments cured a loan’s default such that the subsequent foreclosure on the property was void); 1 Grant S. Nelson, Dale A. Whitman, Ann M. Burkhart & R. Wilson Freyermuth, Real Estate Finance Law § 7:21 (6th ed. 2014) (noting that a trustee’s sale is void where there is no authorization to foreclose, and that there is no authorization to foreclose when the loan is not in default). To complete a valid foreclosure sale for unpaid assessments in Nevada, a UOA must comply with the provisions set forth in NRS Chapter 116. Relevant to the present case, the UOA must mail and record a notice of delinquent assessment, NRS 116.31162(1)(a), “a notice of default and election to sell,” NRS 116.31162(1)(b), and a notice of foreclosure sale, NRS 116.311635(1)(a).

Res. Grp., LLC v. Nev. Ass’n Servs., Inc., 437 P.3d 154, 158 (Nev. 2019)

Facts: the sale was not authorized as noncompliant with statutes

  1. The sale was not authorized by valid corporate action of the HOA Board as defined by NRS 116.31083 and NRS 116.3102 and in SCA bylaws 3.15.
  2. The sale did not comply with the statutes governing HOA foreclosures in NRS 116.31162- NRS 116.31168 (2013).
  3. The sale did not comply with the notice and due process requirements that constrain actions of the HOA Board when it is imposing sanctions for alleged violations of the governing documents, including the alleged violation of delinquent assessments, found in NRS 116.31031, Sun City Anthem CC&Rs 7.4, SCA bylaws 3.26, and NRS 116.31085 and SCA bylaws 3.15A.
  4. Red Rock usurped the authority of the HOA Board by imposing unauthorized fines, fees and charges disregarding NRS 116A.640(8)(9) & (10), NRS 116.31015.

The sale was conducted after the default was cured three times

  1. Check 143, regardless of when or how it was credited paid the $275 quarterly installment of assessments for the period of 7/1/12 to 9/30/12.
  2. Miles Bauer tender of $825 on 5/8/13, would have paid the total delinquent assessments due for the period of 10/1/12 -6/30/13 but for being unlawfully and covertly rejected by Red Rock.
  3. Nationstar negotiator’s offer to the HOA on 5/28/14 of one year ($1,100) assessments to close the escrow on the 5/8/14 $367,500 auction.com sale cured the super-priority of the default, but for Red Rock’s unlawfully and covertly characterizing Nationstar’s offer to the HOA Board as an owner request for waiver. Red Rock falsified the foreclosure file to conceal its misdeeds, and Nationstar aided and abetted Red Rock’s fraud in order to perpetuate a fraud of its own, i.e., to allow the HOA sale to proceed without notice, disregard the restrictions of the PUD Rider Remedies (F), then record a false claim to be Bank of America’s successor in interest, file a false quiet title action against a party with no adverse claim, then falsely claim the HOA sale was unfair to Nationstar because of the rejection of the Miles Bauer tender, but was fair to take away the title rights of the owner. and when the plot was u covered by the owner, claim that Tobin had no rights to assert a quiet title claim.