Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC
2:14-cv-01875
D. Nev.May 1, 2015Background
- Property at 7617 Amato Ave., Las Vegas; borrower Christina Montaruli executed FHA-insured note and deed of trust in May–June 2009; Bayview holds the beneficial interest in the deed of trust.
- Buena Vista HOA, through trustee Nevada Association Services, Inc. (NAS), conducted an HOA foreclosure sale on August 10, 2012; SFR Investments was the high bidder and holds title via recorded foreclosure deed.
- Bayview alleges its federally insured mortgage interest is federal property and that the HOA foreclosure violated the Contracts Clause and Supremacy Clause, so the sale should be voided and title quieted in Bayview.
- NAS moved to dismiss Bayview’s quiet title complaint; Buena Vista HOA joined.
- The court evaluated whether NAS and Buena Vista HOA have a current adverse interest in the property such that Bayview’s NRS 40.010 quiet-title claim can proceed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NAS has an adverse interest for quiet-title relief | NAS remains trustee of record/agent; thus has current interest | NAS only acted as HOA trustee for the foreclosure and holds no current adverse interest | Dismissed: NAS does not assert an adverse interest; no standing under NRS 40.010 |
| Whether Buena Vista HOA has an adverse interest for quiet-title relief | HOA directed the foreclosure and manages the common areas, so it retains an interest | HOA does not claim a current adverse interest after sale; title rests with SFR | Dismissed: Buena Vista HOA lacks an adverse interest; claim against it fails |
| Whether Bayview’s federal-security-interest theory defeats dismissal | Mortgage insured by HUD is federal property implicating constitutional protection | Defendants: dismissal appropriate because claim against these defendants requires their adverse interest, not federal-status argument | Court declined to treat federal-insured status as creating an adverse interest in these defendants; dismissal stands |
| Whether complaint states a plausible claim under Twombly/Iqbal standards | Argues foreclosure void for constitutional violations — contracts and supremacy clauses | Defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of adverse interest | Court found Bayview’s allegations insufficient as to NAS and Buena Vista HOA; quiet-title claim dismissed with prejudice against them |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (two-step pleading analysis; legal conclusions not presumed true)
- Starr v. Baca, 652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011) (post-Iqbal pleading guidance for factual specificity)
- Chapman v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 302 P.3d 1103 (Nev. 2013) (quiet-title requires proving superiority of title)
- Yokeno v. Mafnas, 973 F.2d 803 (9th Cir. 1992) (party asserting quiet title must prove its claim to property)