Bank of New York Mellon v. Sfr Investments Pool 1, LLC ( 2023 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JAN 24 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, FKA No. 19-16891
Bank of New York, as Trustee for the
Certificateholders of the CWABS, Inc., D.C. No.
Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-2, 2:16-cv-01811-GMN-DJA
Plaintiff-counter-
defendant-Appellee, MEMORANDUM*
v.
SOMMERSET PARK HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION; ALESSI & KOENIG,
LLC,
Defendants,
and
SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC,
Defendant-counter-claimant-
cross-claimant-Appellant,
v.
HOUSEHOLD FINANCE REALTY
CORPORATION OF NEVADA; et al.,
Cross-claim-defendants.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 11, 2023**
Pasadena, California
Before: CALLAHAN, R. NELSON, and H.A. THOMAS, Circuit Judges.
SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (SFR) appeals from the district court’s grant
of summary judgment for Bank of New York Mellon (BNYM) in a quiet title and
declaratory relief action involving residential property located in Las Vegas,
Nevada. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, review de novo,
Berezovsky v. Moniz, 869 F.3d 923, 927 (9th Cir. 2017), and affirm.
This case arises from a foreclosure sale to satisfy a homeowners association
(HOA) “superpriority lien” on the property. Nevada law provides that if a
homeowner fails to pay a certain portion of HOA dues, the HOA is authorized to
foreclose on a “superpriority lien” in that amount, extinguishing other liens and
encumbrances on the delinquent property, including a previously recorded first
deed of trust. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.3116. However, a lender holding a first
deed of trust may avoid extinguishment of its lien by tendering payment on the
“superpriority” portion of the unpaid HOA dues. See Bank of Am., N.A. v.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
2
Arlington W. Twilight Homeowners Ass’n, 920 F.3d 620, 622–23 (9th Cir. 2019);
see also Bank of Am., N.A. v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC, 427 P.3d 113, 116–17 (Nev.
2018) (en banc) (Diamond Spur).
SFR’s primary assertion on appeal is that BNYM’s claim is untimely
because it was not filed within three years of the foreclosure sale. This argument
was rejected by the Nevada Supreme Court in U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Thunder
Properties, Inc., 503 P.3d 299 (Nev. 2022), which held that Nevada’s four-year
catch-all statute of limitations applied to quiet title actions. Id. at 302.
As the statute of limitations issue is the only issue clearly developed on this
appeal, we do not address any other arguments.
The district court’s grant of judgment to BNYM is AFFIRMED.
3