HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Ochoa-Delgado, 2:16-cv-01171

Property at 4918 Athens Bay Place, North Las Vegas; Ochoa took out a first deed of trust in 2005; MERS assigned the deed to HSBC in 2009–2010.
Ochoa defaulted on mortgage; HSBC recorded a notice of default in 2009.
HOA (through ACS) recorded delinquent-assessment notices and conducted a nonjudicial foreclosure; ABT purchased the property at HOA foreclosure sale in November 2012 and recorded a trustee’s deed.
HSBC filed suit in 2016 seeking quiet title and related relief, arguing the HOA sale should be set aside as commercially unreasonable and that NRS Chapter 116 is unconstitutional under Bourne Valley.
Both parties moved for summary judgment; the court took judicial notice of the public recorded instruments (deed of trust, assignments, HOA notices, trustee’s deed).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of HOA foreclosure sale / quiet title	Sale was commercially unreasonable (sale price ≈6% of FMV) and CC&Rs mortgage-protection clause raises unfairness	Recorded foreclosure deed recitals are conclusive under NRS 116.31166; sale complied with statutory prerequisites	Court: ABT entitled to judgment; HSBC failed to show fraud, unfairness, or oppression required to set aside sale
Effect of CC&Rs mortgage-protection clause	CC&Rs should have prevented HOA foreclosure or required specific notice contesting clause	CC&R clause does not, by itself, create unfairness or invalidate statutory foreclosure notices	Court: CC&R protection clause, without more, does not justify setting aside sale
Commercial reasonableness standard	Low sale price plus CC&R issue shows commercial unreasonableness	Price often reflects lien amount; price alone insufficient—must show fraud/unfairness/oppression	Court: Plaintiff’s evidence insufficient; mere inadequacy of price not enough
Constitutional due process under Bourne Valley	NRS Chapter 116 notice scheme is facially unconstitutional (opt-in) per Bourne Valley	HSBC actually received notice of the sale; a lender lacking prejudice cannot challenge statute's validity	Court: HSBC received notice; no due-process violation shown; Bourne Valley does not entitle HSBC to relief here

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary-judgment standards)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (evidence credibility and summary judgment)
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (summary-judgment burden-shifting)
SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 334 P.3d 408 (Nev. 2014) (HOA superpriority lien and nonjudicial foreclosure may extinguish first deed of trust)
Shadow Wood Homeowners Ass’n v. New York Cmty. Bancorp., Inc., 366 P.3d 1105 (Nev. 2016) (recitals in HOA foreclosure deed conclusive re statutory prerequisites; courts retain equitable power to set aside sale for fraud/unfairness)
Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 832 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016) (NRS 116.31163(2) opt-in notice scheme found facially unconstitutional)
Jones v. Flowers, 547 U.S. 220 (notice reasonably calculated under circumstances)
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (constitutional notice standard)
Long v. Towne, 639 P.2d 528 (Nev. 1982) (must show fraud, unfairness, or oppression in addition to gross inadequacy of price)
Chapman v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 302 P.3d 1103 (Nev. 2013) (quiet-title plaintiff must prove superiority of title)