Abet Justice L.L.C. et al v. First America Trustee Servicing Solutions, L.L.C. et al
Filing
50
ORDER that 37 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that 41 Defendants' Countermotion for Summary Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that defendants shall provide notice to the Nevada attorney general in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.1, and include proof of such notice upon filing any further motions raising constitutional challenges. FURTHER ORDERED that this court certifies to the Nevada attorn ey general that it may rule on the constitutionality of the state statute at issue in this case, NRS 116.3116. The attorney general shall have thirty (30) days within which to intervene on behalf of the state of Nevada for presentation of argument on the question of the constitutionality of the statute. FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court shall send a copy of this order by certified mail to the Nevada attorney general. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/4/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
8
ABET JUSTICE LLC and GUETATCHEW
FIKROU,
ORDER
Plaintiff(s),
9
10
11
12
Case No. 2:14-CV-908 JCM (GWF)
v.
FIRST AMERICA TRUSTEE SERVICING
SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al.,
Defendant(s).
13
14
Presently before the court is plaintiff Abet Justice LLC’s (hereinafter “plaintiff”) motion
15
for summary judgment. (Doc. # 37). Defendants Bank of New York Mellon; First America
16
Trustee Servicing Solutions, LLC; and Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (hereinafter
17
“defendants”) filed a response, (doc. # 40), and plaintiff filed a reply, (doc. # 44). Plaintiff
18
Guetatchew Fikrou also filed a reply. (Doc. # 45).
19
20
Also before the court is defendants’ countermotion for summary judgment. (Doc. # 41).
Plaintiff filed a response, (doc. # 43), and defendants filed a reply, (doc. # 48).
21
In its countermotion for summary judgment, defendants argue that retroactively applying
22
the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision in SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 334
23
P.3d 408 (Nev. 2014), violates the mortgagee’s due process rights. (Doc. # 41). In their briefing,
24
the parties dispute the issue of whether Nevada Revised Statute 116.3116 is facially
25
unconstitutional. (Docs. # 41, 45, 48).
26
A party that files a motion calling into question the constitutionality of a state statute must
27
promptly “file a notice of constitutional question stating the question and identifying the paper that
28
raises it, if . . . the parties do not include the state, one of its agencies, or one of its officers or
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
1
employees in an official capacity . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1(a)(1)(B).
2
The party must serve the notice on the state attorney general “by certified or registered mail
3
or by sending it to an electronic address designated by the attorney general for this purpose.” Fed.
4
R. Civ. P. 5.1(a)(2). Defendants provide no proof of compliance with this rule.
5
Rule 5.1 also requires the court to “certify to the appropriate attorney general that a statute
6
has been questioned” under 28 U.S.C. § 2403. Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.1(b). This statute states that the
7
court “shall permit the State to intervene for presentation of evidence, if evidence is otherwise
8
admissible in the case, and for argument on the question of constitutionality.” 28 U.S.C. § 2403(b).
9
In light of the foregoing rule and statute, the court will deny the parties’ motions for
10
summary judgment without prejudice to allow defendants and the court to comply and the attorney
11
general to intervene. The parties may renew their motions after the attorney general has been
12
afforded time to respond and upon showing compliance with the notice requirement of Rule 5.1(a).
13
Accordingly,
14
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for
15
summary judgment, (doc. # 37), be, and the same hereby is, DENIED without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants’ countermotion for summary judgment, (doc.
16
17
# 41), be, and the same hereby is, DENIED without prejudice.
18
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants shall provide notice to the Nevada attorney
19
general in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.1, and include proof of such notice
20
upon filing any further motions raising constitutional challenges.
21
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this court certifies to the Nevada attorney general that it
22
may rule on the constitutionality of the state statute at issue in this case, NRS 116.3116. The
23
attorney general shall have thirty (30) days within which to intervene on behalf of the state of
24
Nevada for presentation of argument on the question of the constitutionality of the statute.
25
...
26
...
27
...
28
...
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the clerk of court shall send a copy of this order by
certified mail to the Nevada attorney general.
DATED May 4, 2015.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-3-
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?