Fhfa v. Saticoy Bay, LLC
This text of Fhfa v. Saticoy Bay, LLC (Fhfa v. Saticoy Bay, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 24 2023 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE No. 20-17447 AGENCY; et al., D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellees, 2:16-cv-02242-JAD-BNW
v. MEMORANDUM* SATICOY BAY, LLC,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted February 18, 2022 Submission Withdrawn March 14, 2022 Resubmitted July 20, 2023 San Francisco, California
Before: McKEOWN and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT,** District Judge.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Richard D. Bennett, United States District Judge for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation. Defendant-Appellant Saticoy Bay LLC (“Saticoy”) appeals from the district
court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs-Appellees Federal
Housing Finance Agency, Federal National Mortgage Association, and Federal
Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (collectively, “Appellees”). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the grant of summary judgment de
novo. Nationstar Mortg. LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC, 996 F.3d 950, 954 (9th Cir.
2021).
Saticoy is a master LLC with numerous series LLCs that operate under its
umbrella. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 86.296(2). Appellees sued Saticoy in district court
for declaratory judgment and to quiet title over 37 properties, each of which is
owned either by Saticoy or by one of its series LLCs. Appellees named Saticoy as
the defendant. They did not name any of the series LLCs as defendants. The
district court held that so long as they named and served the master LLC, Saticoy,
as a defendant, Appellees did not need to name the series LLCs as defendants in
order to exercise jurisdiction over them and their properties.
On appeal, Saticoy argues the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant relief
with respect to the series LLCs’ properties because Appellees failed to name the
series LLCs as defendants. On March 14, 2022, we certified to the Nevada
Supreme Court the question whether a series LLC must be sued in its own name
2 for a court to obtain jurisdiction over it and its property, or whether a plaintiff need
only name and serve the master LLC. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency v. Saticoy Bay,
LLC, 28 F.4th 115, 118 (9th Cir. 2022). On April 21, 2022, the Nevada Supreme
Court accepted the question, and on July 6, 2023, it issued an opinion answering
the question. The Nevada Supreme Court held that “a series LLC created pursuant
to NRS 86.296 must be sued in its own name for the court to obtain jurisdiction
over it, provided the series LLC has observed the corporate formalities provided
for in NRS 86.296(3).” Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency v. Saticoy Bay LLC, No. 84370,
2023 WL 4360100, at *1 (Nev. Jul. 6, 2023).
Based on the answer of the Nevada Supreme Court, we affirm in part,
reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. We affirm the judgment with
respect to 372 Rushing Creek Court, owned by Saticoy. We reverse the judgment
with respect to the other properties, owned by the series LLCs. We remand to the
district court for whatever further proceedings it deems appropriate.
We GRANT Saticoy’s motion to strike a portion of Appellees’ citation of
supplemental authority (ECF No. 43).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, REMANDED.
Costs are to be taxed against Appellees.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fhfa v. Saticoy Bay, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fhfa-v-saticoy-bay-llc-ca9-2023.