Mott v. Total Lending Solutions, Inc., 2:23-cv-00151

Plaintiff Rodney Mott filed a notice of lis pendens regarding a property at issue in ongoing litigation.
Defendant Trinity Financial Services LLC (“Trinity Lending”) moved to expunge the lis pendens.
The lis pendens mechanism gives public notice that a property is involved in litigation that could affect its title or possession under Nevada law.
The court found that Mott’s claims against Trinity Lending were previously adjudicated in a prior federal lawsuit (Mott v. The PNC Financial Services Group).
Judge James Mahan previously granted summary judgment to Trinity Lending in that prior case, resolving the same claims and involving the same parties and property.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether to expunge lis pendens under NRS	Lis pendens is proper as the action affects title/possession of property.	Plaintiff has no likelihood of success; claims are precluded.	Expunged; Plaintiff fails to meet statutory factors.
Whether claim preclusion applies	Current action raises new or distinct issues concerning the property.	Same parties, claims, and issues as prior final judgment.	Claim preclusion applies; case already decided.
Likelihood of prevailing on the merits	Plaintiff can succeed based on property rights and disputes.	Plaintiff is barred by prior adverse judgment.	No likelihood; merits already resolved.
Injunctive relief through lis pendens	Necessary to protect Plaintiff's interests while litigation is pending.	No injury justifies maintaining lis pendens post-judgment.	Not justified; no injury or equitable basis present.

Orange Cty. Airport Hotel Assocs. v. Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., 52 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1995) (federal courts apply state law standards to expunge lis pendens)
Five Star Capital Corp. v. Ruby, 194 P.3d 709 (Nev. 2008) (sets out Nevada’s three-part test for claim preclusion)
Tahican v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., 523 P.3d 550 (Nev. 2023) (explains purpose and procedures for lis pendens in Nevada)