U.S. Bank, N.A. Vs. Sfr Invs. Pool 1, Llc (Nrap 5)

489 P.3d 514

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: June 25, 2021
• Docket: 82988
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

U.S. BANK, N.A., TRUSTEE FOR THE No. 82988 HOLDERS OF THE J.P. MORGAN MORTGAGE TRUST 2007-S3; NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; AND BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., FILED Appellants, vs. JUN 2 5 2021 SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC; A. BROWN UPREME COURT AND SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS BY CLERK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Res eondents.

ORDER DECLINING CERTIFIED QUESTIONS This matter involves legal questions certified to this court, under NRAP 5, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Specifically, the Ninth Circuit has certified the following question to this court: Whether, under Nevada law, an HONs misrepresentation that its superpriority lien would not extinguish a first deed of trust, made both in the mortgage protection clause in its CC&Rs and in statements by its agent in contemporaneous arbitration proceedings, constitute slight evidence of fraud, unfairness, or oppression affecting the foreclosure sale that would justify setting it aside. The certifying order also asks this court "to consider the related issue of what evidence a first deed of trust holder must show to establish a causal relationship between a misrepresentation that constitutes unfairness under [pertinent Nevada caselaw] and a low sales price." Having considered the questions and the Ninth Circuit's certification order, we are not persuaded that there is a lack of controlling precedent or that any answers would help settle important questions of law. SUPREME Com OF NEVADA _ (0) 1947A 400,

- See Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc. v. Ricci, 122 Nev. 746, 749-51, 137 P.3d 1161, 1163-64 (2006) (discussing the factors this court considers when determining whether to accept a certified question, including whether controlling precedent exists or whether any answer would settle important issues of law). In particular, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2227 Shadow Canyon, 133 Nev. 740, 405 P.3d 641 (2017), and Shadow Wood Homeowners Ass'n v. New York Community Bancorp, Inc., 132 Nev. 49, 366 P.3d 1105 (2016), both discussed in the Ninth Circuit's order, constitute controlling precedent on the issues presented. And resolving the questions would not settle important questions of law, but would merely involve applying already established law to the facts in the Ninth Circuit's case. Accordingly, we decline to accept the certified questions. It is so ORDERED.'

Hardesty

J. A-aift...0 , J. arraguirre Stiglich

, J. 4111 Cadish Pickering

Herndon A 'aen J , J.

1The Honorable Abbi Silver, Justice, voluntarily recused herself from participation in the decision of this matter.

2 cc: Akerman LLP/Las Vegas Richard Aaron Chastain Stephen Colmery Parsley Kim Gilbert Ebron Alverson Taylor & Sanders Clerk, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

•r; •