Bank of America, N.A. v. Lake Mead Court Homeowners Association et al
Filing
113
DEFAULT JUDGMENT in favor of SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC against Carlos Nevarez re 110 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 2/14/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
______________________________________
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., SUCCESSOR
Case No. 2:16-cv-00504-GMN-NJK
BY MERGER TO BAC HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP, FKA COUNTRYWIDE
JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT AGAINST
HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP,
CARLOS NEVAREZ
Plaintiff,
vs.
8
LAKE MEAD COURT HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION; SFR INVESTMENTS POOL
1, LLC; ALESSI & KOENIG, LLC,
9
Defendants.
10
Counter/Cross Claimant,
12
(702) 485-3300 FAX (702) 485-3301
KIM GILBERT EBRON
7625 DEAN MARTIN DRIVE, SUITE 110
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89139
11
______________________________________
SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, a Nevada
limited liability company,
13
vs.
14
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., SUCCESSOR
BY MERGER TO BAC HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE
HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP; and
CARLOS NEVAREZ, an individual,
15
16
Counter-Defendant/Cross-Defendant.
17
18
19
This matter came before the Court on SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC’s (“SFR”) application
20
for default judgment against Cross-Defendants CARLOS NEVAREZ (“Nevarez” or “Cross-
21
Defendant). Having considered the application, including the declarations attached thereto, the
22
Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
23
1.
On May 14, 2016, SFR filed a Cross-Claim (ECF No. 32) for quiet title and declaratory
24
relief against Nevarez (“Cross-Claim”) relating to real property located at 2092 Scanlon
25
Ferry, Unit 103, Las Vegas, NV 89156; Parcel No. 140-22-618-081 (“Property”).
26
2.
Cross-Defendant failed to answer the complaint within the 21-day time limit set forth in
27
FRCP 12. The Clerk of the Court appropriately entered a default against Nevarez on
28
May 30, 2018, (ECF No. 86).
-1-
Case 2:16-cv-00504-GMN-NJK Document 110-9 Filed 02/12/19 Page 3 of 4
1
3.
Cross-Defendant is not incompetent, an infant or serving in the United States military.
2
4.
SFR submitted credible evidence in support of its application in the form of documents
3
obtained from the Official Records of the Clark County Recorder and declarations made
4
under penalty of perjury that demonstrate prima facie grounds sufficient to enter default
5
judgment against Nevarez.
6
5.
Specifically, SFR’s superior interest in the Property relative to any interest claimed by
7
Nevarez is evident by the recorded notice of delinquent assessment lien, notice of default,
8
notice of sale, and the foreclosure deed. (See Statutory Notices, Exs. D, E, F to Pl.’s MSJ,
9
ECF Nos. 83-4, 83-5, 83-6); (see also Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale, Ex. H to Pl.’s MSJ,
purchase of the Property—and in light of SFR’s evidence of its superior interest, SFR's
12
(702) 485-3300 FAX (702) 485-3301
KIM GILBERT EBRON
83-8). Because the Court held that the foreclosure sale remains intact—including SFR’s
11
7625 DEAN MARTIN DRIVE, SUITE 110
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89139
10
claims against Borrower are meritorious.
13
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to FRCP 55(b)(2), having considered the evidence and
14
made the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and finding good cause,
15
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Cross-Defendant Nevarez, any successors and
16
17
18
19
assigns, have no right, title or interest in the Property.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this judgment does not adjudicate SFR’s claims
against, or the defenses of, any other party to this case.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in light of the parties' representations that SFR's
20
claims against Nevarez are the only remaining claims in this case, (ECF No. 109), the clerk of
21
court is instructed to close this case.
22
IT IS SO ORDERED.
23
24
25
26
27
28
14
DATED this _____day of February, 2019.
______________________________
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?