Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness Glen Avenue et al

Filing 120

ORDER Granting 119 Stipulation to Set Bench Trial Date. Calendar Call set for 3/22/2023 at 01:30 PM in LV Courtroom 6A before Judge James C. Mahan. Bench Trial set for 3/27/2023 at 09:00 AM in LV Courtroom 6A before Judge James C. Mahan. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 8/25/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TRW)

Case 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW Document 120 Filed 08/25/22 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6

WRIGHT, FINLAY & ZAK, LLP
Robert Riether Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 12076
7785 W. Sahara Ave., Suite 200
Las Vegas, NV 89117
[phone]; Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee
for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9
10

WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY,
FSB, AS TRUSTEE FOR STANWICH
MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST A,

11
12
13
14
15

Case No.: 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET
BENCH TRIAL DATE

Plaintiff,
vs.
SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 9338
WILDERNESS GLEN AVENUE;
YELLOWSTONE HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION,
Defendants.

16
17
18

SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 9338
WILDERNESS GLEN AVENUE,

19
20
21
22

Counterclaimant,
vs.
WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY,
FSB, AS TRUSTEE FOR STANWICH
MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST A,

23
24
25

Counter-Defendant.
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Edward Brown (“Brown”), as substituted party for

26
27
28

Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A
(“Wilmington”), and Defendant/Counterclaimant Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness Glen

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW Document 120 Filed 08/25/22 Page 2 of 4

1
2

Avenue (“Saticoy”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their counsel of record, by and
through their respective attorneys of records, hereby agree and stipulate as follows.

3
4

1. The sole narrow remaining issue at this stage of the case is the issue of “prejudice” as

5

explained in U.S. Bank, Nat’l Ass’n ND v. Res. Grp., LLC, 444 P.3d 442, 446 (Nev.

6

2019) (“Resources Group”) as well as the Ninth Circuit’s November 17, 2021 order of

7

reversal in this matter regarding the “notice/prejudice rule” applicable to foreclosure

8
9

sales (the “Ninth Circuit Order”). (ECF No. 95).

10

2. On December 29, 2021, this Court issued its order (the “Supplement Order”), ordering

11

that Brown supplement its briefing to address the limited issue of prejudice as it relates

12

to the notice/prejudice issue. (ECF No. 99). On February 16, 2022, Brown submitted

13

its supplement (the “Brown Supplement”). (ECF No. 106). On March 4, 2022,

14

Saticoy Bay filed its respective supplemental opposition (the “Saticoy Bay

15

Supplemental Opposition”). (ECF No. 111).

16

3. On April 15, 2022, this Court issued its order denying summary judgment (the “Post-

17

Remand Order”), holding “there remains a genuine issue of material fact as to whether

18

[Brown] suffered prejudice as a result of Saticoy’s failure to provide notice”. (ECF

19

No. 112 at 3:6-8). The Court further ordered the parties engage in a settlement

20

conference before Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler where the case did not resolve.

21

Id. at 3:15-16.

22

4. In the Ninth Circuit Order, the Ninth Circuit remanded “to allow the district court to

23

evaluate in the first instance whether Wilmington has made a sufficient showing of

24

prejudice.” (ECF No. 95 at 3 and ECF No. 112 at 1:20-22). Subsequently, in the Post-

25

Remand Order, this Court made clear that it “ordered [Brown] to supplement its

26

motion for summary judgment as to the issue of whether it suffered prejudice…”

27

(ECF No. 112 at 1:23-24). In denying Brown summary judgment post-remand, this

28

Court continued, holding “there remains a genuine issue of material fact as to whether

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW Document 120 Filed 08/25/22 Page 3 of 4

1

[Brown] suffered prejudice as a result of Saticoy’s failure to provide notice.” Id. at

2

3:6-7.

3
4

5. As a result, the Parties now stipulate to a bench trial (no more than one day) to
determine the sole remaining issue of “prejudice” under Resources Group.

5

6. Based on the above and pursuant to this Court’s August 4, 2022 Minute Order (ECF

6

No. 118), the Parties hereby jointly request a bench trial date to be set by this Court

7

on one of the following dates, pursuant to the Court’s availability. Should this Court

8

be unavailable on any of the two proposed date ranges below, the Parties hereby

9

request a status check with the Court to ascertain mutually agreeable date:

10

a. Any day during the week of January 30, 2023 through February 3, 2023;

11

b. Any day during the week of March 6, 2023 through March 10, 2023.

12
13
14

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED this 22nd day of August, 2022.

DATED this 22nd day of August, 2022.

15
WRIGHT, FINLAY & ZAK, LLP

ROGER P. CROTEAU & ASSOCIATES,
LTD

/s/ Robert A. Riether
Robert Riether Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 12076
Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as
Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A

/s/ Christopher L. Benner______________
Christopher L. Benner, Esq.
Nevada Bar No. 8963
Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant
Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness
Glen Avenue

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW Document 120 Filed 08/25/22 Page 4 of 4

1
2
3

ORDER
Based on the aforementioned stipulation, this matter is set for a one day bench trial on
March 27, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. Calendar call is set for March 22, 2023, at 1:30 p.m.

4
5

6
7

IT IS so ORDERED August 25, 2022.

8
9

t. ,/4/JJ,1a,_.__

10

�J

11

UN TEDTATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Page4 of4