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)

Download PDF
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: (800) 741-8806 Fax: (949) 252-1032 Email: 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: (800) 741-8806 /s/ Zachary T. Ball Zachary T. Ball, #8364 The Ball Law Group 3455 Cliff Shadows Parkway, Suite 150 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129 Phone: (702) 303-8600 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

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?