Bank of America, N.A. v. Falcon Pointe Association et al

Filing 92

ORDER that Plaintiff Bank of America, N.A.'s 66 Motion to Stay Discovery and Remaining Case Deadlines Pending Resolution of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED. Defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC's 70 and 71 Counter Motions to allow the case to proceed without restriction, or in the alternative, for a complete stay of litigation are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 1/10/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
***
8
9
10
11
12
13

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
)
v.
)
)
FALCON POINTE ASSOCIATION, et al., )
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

14

Case No. 2:16-cv-00814-GMN-CWH
ORDER

Presently before the court is plaintiff Bank of America, N.A.’s (“Bank of America”) Motion

15

to Stay Discovery and Remaining Case Deadlines Pending Resolution of Motion for Partial

16

Summary Judgment (ECF No. 66), filed on November 8, 2017. Defendant Red Rock Financial

17

Services, LLC filed a joinder (ECF No. 67) to the motion on November 15, 2017. On November

18

22, 2017, Defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (“SFR”) filed a response (ECF No. 69) and

19

counter motions (ECF Nos. 70, 71) to allow the case to proceed without restriction, or in the

20

alternative, for a complete stay of litigation pending resolution of a certified question currently

21

before the Nevada Supreme Court. Bank of America filed a reply (ECF No. 81) in support of its

22

motion to stay discovery and responses (ECF Nos. 82, 83) to SFR’s counter motions on December

23

6, 2017. SFR filed replies (ECF Nos. 87, 88) in support of its counter motions on December 19,

24

2017.

25

This case arises from a dispute regarding a homeowners’ association foreclosure sale. In

26

2016, the court stayed this case pending exhaustion of all appeals in Bourne Valley Court Trust v.

27

Wells Fargo Bank, No. 15-15233 (9th Cir. Aug. 12, 2016). (Order (ECF No. 57).) After the

28

United States Supreme Court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari, the court lifted the stay.

1

(Order (ECF No. 64).) Both Bank of America and SFR subsequently filed motions for partial

2

summary judgment. While Bank of America seeks to stay discovery pending the outcome of its

3

motion for partial summary judgment, SFR seeks to have the litigation proceed without restriction

4

on discovery, or in the alternative, for a complete stay of the litigation pending the outcome of a

5

question that was certified to the Nevada Supreme Court.

6

Having read and considered the parties’ arguments, the court declines to stay discovery or to

7

stay the case in its entirety. The court further finds that the case should proceed on the normal

8

litigation track, as governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the scheduling order (ECF

9

No. 78) in this case.

10

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff Bank of America, N.A.’s (“Bank of

11

America”) Motion to Stay Discovery and Remaining Case Deadlines Pending Resolution of Motion

12

for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 66) is DENIED.

13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC’s counter

14

motions (ECF Nos. 70, 71) to allow the case to proceed without restriction, or in the alternative, for

15

a complete stay of litigation are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The counter motions are

16

granted to the extent that the case will proceed unrestricted. The counter motions are denied in all

17

other respects.

18
19

DATED: January 10, 2018

20
21
22
23

______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge

24
25
26
27
28
2