NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 16 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES, No. 19-15911
LLC,
D.C. No.
Plaintiff-counter- 2:17-cv-01530-JAD-PAL
defendant-Appellee,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LIBERTY AT MAYFIELD COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION,
Defendant,
and
SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC,
Defendant-counter-claimant-
Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 14, 2020**
San Francisco, California
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Before: IKUTA and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and TAGLE,*** District Judge.
In 2009, two individuals purchased a Nevada residence with a loan secured
by a deed of trust; Bank of America later acquired the deed of trust. After the buyers
failed to pay assessments of the Liberty at Mayfield Community Association (the
“HOA”), the HOA recorded a Notice of Default and Election to Sell. Bank of
America’s attorneys obtained the account ledger identifying the total amount due
and tendered a cashier’s check for nine months of HOA dues. The HOA rejected
the tender and sold the property at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale in 2013 to SFR
Investments Pool 1, LLC.
Bank of America later assigned the deed of trust to Carrington Mortgage
Services, LLC. In 2017, Carrington brought this quiet title action against SFR and
the HOA, alleging that the deed of trust still encumbered the property. The district
court entered summary judgment for Carrington. We have jurisdiction over SFR’s
appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.
1. Carrington had standing to bring a quiet title action. Carrington
proffered unrebutted evidence that it was assigned the deed of trust. See Edelstein
v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 286 P.3d 249, 260 (Nev. 2012). A quiet title action is simply
a judicial determination of the claimed interests in real property. See Chapman v.
***
The Honorable Hilda G. Tagle, United States District Judge for the
Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation.
2
Deutsche Bank Nat’l Tr. Co., 302 P.3d 1103, 1106–07 (Nev. 2013) (citing Nev. Rev.
Stat. § 40.010). A deed of trust establishes the holder’s interest in the property even
if separated from the promissory note. Edelstein, 286 P.3d at 259–60; see also In re
Montierth, 354 P.3d 648, 650–51 (Nev. 2015).
2. Bank of America’s tender satisfied the superpriority portion of the
HOA lien. Because the HOA’s ledger did not list any charges for maintenance or
nuisance abatement, the tender of nine months of HOA dues covered the entire
superpriority amount. See Bank of Am., N.A. v. Arlington W. Twilight Homeowners
Ass’n, 920 F.3d 620, 623 (9th Cir. 2019) (per curiam). Even assuming the tender
letter inaccurately claimed that certain charges were junior to the deed of trust, no
such charges are at issue and thus the purported misstatement did not alter the
tender’s legal effect. See Bank of Am., N.A. v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC
(Diamond Spur), 427 P.3d 113, 118, 121 (Nev. 2018) (en banc). And, the
misstatement did not make the tender impermissibly conditional because it did not
require anything of the HOA. See id. at 118; see also Alliant Commercial, LLC v.
Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 443 P.3d 544 (Nev. 2019) (unpublished table decision)
(analyzing a nearly identical tender letter).
3. SFR’s purported status as a bona fide purchaser (“BFP”) does not affect
the result. “A party’s status as a BFP is irrelevant when a defect in the foreclosure
proceeding renders the sale void.” Diamond Spur, 427 P.3d at 121. “A foreclosure
3
sale on a mortgage lien after valid tender satisfies that lien is void, as the lien is no
longer in default.” Id.
AFFIRMED.
4