Edward Brown v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness Glen Avenue

Opinion

WRIGHT, FINLAY & ZAK, LLP 1 Robert Riether Esq. 2 Nevada Bar No. 12076 7785 W. Sahara Ave., Suite 200 3 Las Vegas, NV 89117 (702)475-7964; Fax: (702) 946-1345 4 rriether@wrightlegal.net 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, Case No.: 2:17-cv-01775-JCM-BNW STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET 11 Plaintiff, BENCH TRIAL DATE vs. 12 13 SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 9338 WILDERNESS GLEN AVENUE; ASSOCIATION, 15 16 Defendants. 17 SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 9338 19 Counterclaimant, 20 vs. MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST A, 23 Counter-Defendant. 24 25 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Edward Brown (“Brown”), as substituted party for 26 Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A 27 28 (“Wilmington”), and Defendant/Counterclaimant Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness Glen Avenue (“Saticoy”) (collectively, the “Parties”), by and through their counsel of record, by and 1 2 through their respective attorneys of records, hereby agree and stipulate as follows. 3 1. The sole narrow remaining issue at this stage of the case is the issue of “prejudice” as 4 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 sales (the “Ninth Circuit Order”). (ECF No. 95). 9 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 1 [Brown] suffered prejudice as a result of Saticoy’s failure to provide notice.” Id. at 2 3:6-7. 3 5. As a result, the Parties now stipulate to a bench trial (no more than one day) to 4 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 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 13 14 DATED this 22nd day of August, 2022. DATED this 22nd day of August, 2022. 15 WRIGHT, FINLAY & ZAK, LLP ROGER P. CROTEAU & ASSOCIATES, 16 LTD 17 /s/ Robert A. Riether /s/ Christopher L. Benner______________ 18 Robert Riether Esq. Christopher L. Benner, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 12076 Nevada Bar No. 8963 19 Attorneys for Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Saticoy Bay LLC Series 9338 Wilderness 20 Trustee for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust A Glen Avenue 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Based on the aforementioned stipulation, this matter is set for a one day bench tial on 3 || March 27, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. Calendar call is set for March 22, 2023, at 1:30 p.m. 5 7 IT IS SO ORDERED August 25, 2022. 9 10 tins ©. Mahan 1 UNITED)STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28