LN Management, LLC Series 5664 Divot v. Dansker et al

Filing 85

ORDER that the Motion to Compel ECF No. 75 is DENIED as moot; the parties shall consult with the Magistrate Judge forthwith to establish a scheduling order. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 08/24/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KW)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ______________________________________ ) ) LN MANAGEMENT, LLC SERIES 5664 ) DIVOT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) KIT DANSKER et al., ) ) Defendants. ) 2:13-cv-01420-RCJ-GWF ORDER 12 13 This is a removed quiet title action between the buyer of a property at a homeowners’ 14 association foreclosure sale and the holders of the first deed of trust. The deed of trust holder 15 moved for summary judgment under Bourne Valley Court Tr. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 832 16 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016). The buyer countered that the Court should remand for lack of 17 diversity under Weeping Hollow Ave. Tr. v. Spencer, 831 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2016). Because 18 diversity depended on the citizenships of the yet unknown deceased homeowner’s successor(s)- 19 in-interest and the buyer LLC’s member(s), the Court gave the parties several months to engage 20 in jurisdictional discovery. 21 The parties have noted at a status conference that the only fact question potentially 22 preventing diversity jurisdiction would be if one or more of Kit Dansker’s successors-in-interest 23 were Nevada residents. But the parties have yet to discover the identities of Dansker’s heirs. 24 1 of 2 1 The dispositive issue at this time is therefore the fact that Dansker’s successors have not been 2 served. The possibility of a future quiet title action by one of those persons does not destroy 3 complete diversity where the state citizenships of such persons is unknown. There being no lack 4 of diversity between the joined and served parties, the Court is satisfied of its jurisdiction and 5 will not delay the case any longer. Any party later discovering a lack of subject matter 6 jurisdiction may bring the issue to the attention of the Court. CONCLUSION 7 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion to Compel (ECF No. 75) is DENIED as 8 9 10 11 12 13 moot. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall consult with the Magistrate Judge forthwith to establish a scheduling order. IT IS SO ORDERED. 24th day August, 2017. Dated this 9th day of of August, 2017. 14 15 16 _____________________________________ ROBERT C. JONES United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2 of 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?