Summit Real Estate Group, Inc. v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Coropration et al

Filing 47

ORDER Granting 46 Stipulation to Continue Stay. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 2/27/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

KEVIN HAHN, #9821
NATHAN F. SMITH, #12642
MALCOLM ♦ CISNEROS, A Law Corporation
608 South 8th Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation; M&T Bank

8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

11

Case No. 2:15-cv-00760-KJD-GWF

SUMMIT REAL ESTATE GROUP, INC.

12

Plaintiff,

13

vs.

14

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE
CORPORATION; FHLMC BANK, MITCHELL
LABORWIT,

15
16

Defendants.

17
18

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STAY

19

On December 14, 2016, the Ninth Circuit issued its mandate in Bourne Valley Court Trust v.

20

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., a decision which may have a significant effect on this case. See Bourne Valley

21

Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 832 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016). On January 30, 2017, Justice

22

Anthony Kennedy extended the time for Bourne Valley Court Trust to file a petition for a writ of

23

certiorari to March 6, 2017. The parties also note that the Nevada Supreme Court has stayed the

24

issuance of remittitur in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104 v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., a Div.

25

of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (2017), pending the prospective filing of Wells Fargo

26

Home Mortgage’s petition for a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. Based upon the

27

foregoing, the parties anticipate that the United States Supreme Court may grant certiorari and hear the

28

cases jointly.

Stipulation and Order

1

1

A district court has the inherent power to stay cases to control its docket and promote the

2

efficient use of judicial resources. Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254–55 (1936); Dependable

3

Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066 (9th Cir. 2007). When determining

4

whether to stay a case pending the resolution of another case, a district court must consider (1) the

5

possible damage that may result from a stay, (2) any “hardship or inequity” that a party may suffer if

6

required to go forward, (3) “and the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or

7

complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law” that a stay will engender. Lockyer v. Mirant Corp.,

8

398 F.3d 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005).

9

In this case, the parties submit that no damage will result from a continuance of the stay of this

10

case for a further 30 days, pending the filing of a petition for writ of certiorari with the United States

11

Supreme Court. However, should such petition not be filed, the parties will promptly stipulate to end

12

the stay in this case and proceed with filing any dispositive motions within 30 days of the Court’s order

13

terminating the stay of this case. Moreover, if the Court is not inclined to continue the stay of this case,

14

the parties will promptly file a stipulation ending such stay upon denial of the instant stipulation.

15

Dated: February 24, 2017

Dated: February 24, 2017

/s/ Nathan F. Smith
Nathan F. Smith, #12642
Malcolm ♦ Cisneros, A Law Corporation
608 South 8th Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Phone: [phone]

/s/ Zachary T. Ball
Zachary T. Ball, #8364
The Ball Law Group
3455 Cliff Shadows Parkway, Suite 150
Las Vegas, Nevada 89129
Phone: [phone]

Attorney for Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation and M&T Bank

Attorney for Plaintiffs

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.
27th
DATED this ___ day of February, 2017

25
26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

27
28

Stipulation and Order

2