Opinion
No. 78070-COA
04-28-2020
G2 VENTURES, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Appellant, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Respondent.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
G2 Ventures, LLC (G2), appeals from a district court order granting summary judgment, certified as final pursuant to NRCP 54(b), in a quiet title action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jerry A. Wiese, Judge.
The original owners of the subject property failed to make periodic payments to their homeowners' association (HOA). The HOA recorded a notice of delinquent assessment lien and later a notice of default and election to sell to collect on the past due assessments and other fees pursuant to NRS Chapter 116. Prior to the sale, the predecessor to respondent Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (Nationstar)—holder of the first deed of trust on the property—tendered payment to the HOA foreclosure agent for nine months of past due assessments, but the agent rejected the tender and proceeded with its foreclosure sale, at which the predecessor to G2 purchased the property. G2 later initiated the underlying action seeking to quiet title to the property, and Nationstar counterclaimed seeking the same. Both parties moved for summary judgment, and the district court ruled in Nationstar's favor, finding that the tender extinguished the superpriority portion of the HOA's lien such that G2 took title to the property subject to Nationstar's deed of trust. This appeal followed.
This court reviews a district court's order granting summary judgment de novo. Wood v. Safeway, Inc., 121 Nev. 724, 729, 121 P.3d 1026, 1029 (2005). Summary judgment is proper if the pleadings and all other evidence on file demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id. When deciding a summary judgment motion, all evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Id. General allegations and conclusory statements do not create genuine issues of fact. Id. at 731, 121 P.3d at 1030-31.
Here, the district court correctly found that the tender of nine months of past due assessments—even in the absence of any sum associated with the HOA's foreclosure fees and costs—extinguished the superpriority lien such that G2 took the property subject to Nationstar's deed of trust. See Bank of Am., N.A. v. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC, 134 Nev. 604, 605, 427 P.3d 113, 116 (2018); see also Horizons at Seven Hills Homeowners Ass'n v. Ikon Holdings, LLC, 132 Nev. 362, 371, 373 P.3d 66, 72 (2016) (holding that an HOA's superpriority lien "does not include an amount for collection fees and foreclosure costs incurred; rather it is limited to an amount equal to the common expense assessments due during the nine months before foreclosure"). We reject G2's argument that the tender could not have extinguished the superpriority lien because the HOA's foreclosure agent had a good-faith basis for rejecting it. The subjective good faith of the foreclosure agent in rejecting a valid tender cannot validate an otherwise void sale. See Bank of Am., 134 Nev. at 612, 427 P.3d at 121 ("[A]fter a valid tender of the superpriority portion of an HOA lien, a foreclosure sale on the entire lien is void as to the superpriority portion, because it cannot extinguish the first deed of trust on the property."); Restatement (Third) of Prop.: Mortgs. § 6.4(b) & cmt. c (Am. Law Inst. 1997) (indicating that a party's reasons for rejecting a tender may be relevant insofar as that party may be liable for money damages but that the reason for rejection does not alter the tender's legal effect). Accordingly, we conclude that no genuine issue of material fact exists to prevent summary judgment in favor of Nationstar, see Wood, 121 Nev. at 729, 121 P.3d at 1029, and we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge
The Wright Law Group
Akerman LLP/Las Vegas
Eighth District Court Clerk