Karl v. HSBC Bank, USA, Na

 v. HSBC Bank, USA, NA, Docket No. 57561 (Order Affirming in Part,
Reversing in Part and Remanding, January 20, 2012). On remand,
following a hearing, the district court entered an order concluding that
HSBC provided sufficient documentation because Wells Fargo was acting
as HSBC's servicer. Appellant now appeals, arguing that insufficient
documentation was provided to establish the district court's finding.
In an appeal from a district court order granting or denying
judicial review in an FMP matter, this court defers to the district court's
factual determinations and reviews de novo the district court's legal
determinations. Edelstein v. Bank of N.Y Mellon, 128 Nev. , 286
P.3d 249, 260 (2012). To obtain an FMP certificate, a deed of trust
beneficiary must: (1) attend the mediation; (2) participate in good faith; (3)
bring the required documents; and (4) if attending through a
representative, have a person present with authority to modify the loan or
access to such person. NRS 107.086(4) and (5); Leyva v. Nat'l Default
Servicing Corp., 127 Nev. , 255 P.3d 1275, 1278-79 (2011).
Having reviewed the briefs and appendix on appeal, we affirm
the district court's finding that sufficient documentation was presented by
HSBC. Appellant argues that no document was provided establishing that
Wells Fargo was acting as servicer for HSBC, but no statute or foreclosure
mediation rule required production of such a document at the time the
relevant mediation took place. See Edelstein, 128 Nev. at n.11, 286
P.3d at 260 n.11. Based on the district court's finding that Wells Fargo
acted as servicer for HSBC, the record demonstrates that the required
documents were provided at mediation. Therefore, the district court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
r+-s .
properly denied the petition for judicial review and sanctions.
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.'
I
Douglas
J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge
Terry J. Thomas
Snell & Wilmer, LLP/Las Vegas
McCarthy & Holthus LLP/Reno
Washoe District Court Clerk
'We limit our review on appeal to the issues outlined in our prior
order of remand. As such, we do not address the other arguments raised
by the parties in their appellate briefs.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A