PNC Bank, National Association v. Mao and Zhang LV LLC

Filing 29

ORDER Granting 28 Stipulation to Stay Case. This stay will expire after the Ninth Circuit issues a mandate in Bourne Valley and the Nevada Supreme Court issues an opinion in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104. Status Hearing set for 12/16/2016 10:00 AM in LV Courtroom 3D before Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 9/9/2016. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

COLT B. DODRILL, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 9000
GREGORY S. BEAN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 12694
WOLFE & WYMAN LLP
6757 Spencer Street
Las Vegas, NV 89119
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a
National Banking Association,
Plaintiff,
MAO AND ZHANG LV LLC; DOES 1 through
10, inclusive; ROES Business Entities 1 through
10, inclusive; and all others who claim interest in
the subject property located at 210 E. Flamingo
Road, #417, Las Vegas, NV 89169,
Defendants.
MAO AND ZHANG LV LLC,

20
21
22
23
24
25

STIPULATION AND ORDER
TO STAY CASE

v.

18
19

CASE NO.: 2:15-cv-01164-KJD-VCF

Counterclaimant,
v.
RODICA SCHILERU; PNC BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
SYSTEMS, INC.; DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS 1
through 10, inclusive,
Counter-Defendants.

26
27
28

1
2540716.1

1

MAO AND ZHANG LV LLC,

2
3
4
5
6

Third Party Plaintiff,
v.
RODICA SCHILERU; MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
SYSTEMS, INC.; DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive; and ROE CORPORATIONS 1
through 10, inclusive,

7

Third-Party Defendants.

8
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY CASE

9

Plaintiff/Counter-defendant PNC Bank, NA, and Defendant/Counterclaimant Mao and

10
11
12
13

Zhang, LLC, (the only parties having been served and appearing in the case; collectively the
“Parties”) by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. This lawsuit is one of hundreds where the parties dispute the effect of a non-judicial
foreclosure sale held by an HOA pursuant to NRS 116.3116 et seq. (the "Statute") for an

14

owner's failure to pay HOA assessments.

15
16

2. On August 12, 2016, the Ninth Circuit issued a decision in Bourne Valley Court Trust v.
Wells Fargo Bank, NA., No. 15-15233, slip op. (9th Cir. August 12, 2016), holding that NRS

17

116.3116 et seq. is facially unconstitutional under the due process clause of the Fourteenth

18

Amendment to the United States Constitution.

19
20
21

3. The Parties dispute the impact that Bourne Valley has on the claims in this lawsuit.
4. Counsel for the petitioner in Bourne Valley filed a petition for re-hearing on August 26,
2016, and in connection therewith, requested that the Ninth Circuit stay publication of the

22

opinion.

23
24

5. The Nevada Supreme Court heard oral argument on September 8, 2016, in Saticoy Bay LLC
Series 350 Durango 104 v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Nevada Supreme Court case

25

68630, Nevada District Court case A-13-688410-C. This case addresses the same issues as

26

Bourne Valley.

27
28

6. On information and belief, the Nevada Supreme Court will expedite issuing an opinion in in
2
2540716.1

1

in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104 that will construe NRS 116.3116 et seq. and

2

eliminate substantial uncertainty that currently exists in this area of the law.

3

7. Staying this case pending the Nevada Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit’s opinion will avoid

4

premature arguments or briefing on the Bourne Valley decision and will enable the Parties to

5

present argument and evidence to this Court with complete legal authority, thereby

6

promoting the most efficient use of the Court's and the Parties' limited resources.

7

8. Because the oral argument in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104 is imminent and the

8

Nevada Supreme Court is certainly aware of the hundreds of lawsuits that will affected, if not

9

resolved, by the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision, the stay is not indefinite.

10

9. Accordingly, the parties request that all proceedings in this lawsuit are stayed, and all

11

upcoming deadlines, hearings, and conferences be vacated.

12

10. The parties agree that Mao and Zhang LLC will maintain the property at issue in its current

13

condition and will abide by all obligations and responsibilities arising from Defendant

14

Mao and Zhang LLC’s alleged ownership interest in the property, including but not

15

limited to the payment of all applicable fees, assessments, taxes, and other financial

16

obligations.

17

11. The Parties agree that PNC will not pursue foreclosure against the property at issue during

18

the stay.

19

12. The Parties agree that Defendant Mao and Zhang LLC will not sell, transfer, or convey the

20

property while this case is stayed.

21

13. This stay will expire after the Ninth Circuit issues a mandate in Bourne Valley and the

22

Nevada Supreme Court issues an opinion in Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104.

23

14. Within fifteen (15) days after the mandate is issued, the parties shall file a notice

24

informing the Court that the stay has expired and requesting that the Court set a status

25

hearing.

26

///

27

///

28

///
3
2540716.1

1

15. If the Court desires, the parties request that the Court set a status check for approximately 90

2

days from the date of entry of this Stipulation and Order.

3
4

Dated: September 9, 2016

Dated: September 9, 2016

5

WOLFE & WYMAN, LLP

THE LAW OFFICES OF MIKE BEEDE,
PLLC

By: /s/ Gregory S. Bean
Colt B. Dodrill, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 9000
Gregory S. Bean, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 12694
6757 Spencer Street
Las Vegas, NV 89119
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION

By: /s/ Cheryl A. Grames
Michael Beede, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 13068
Cheryl A. Grames, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 12752
2300 W. Sahara Ave, Suite 420
Las Vegas, NV 89102
Attorneys for MAO AND ZHANG LV
LLC

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

ORDER

14
15
IT IS SO ORDERED:

16
17
18

September 9, 2016
DATED: __________________________

_____________________________________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a status hearing is scheduled for December 16, 2016 at 10:00
a.m., in courtroom 3D.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4
2540716.1