VEGAS UNITED INV. SERIES 105, INC. VS. CELTIC BANK CORP.

2019 NV 61, 453 P.3d 1229
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 19, 2019
Docket74163
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 2019 NV 61 (VEGAS UNITED INV. SERIES 105, INC. VS. CELTIC BANK CORP.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
VEGAS UNITED INV. SERIES 105, INC. VS. CELTIC BANK CORP., 2019 NV 61, 453 P.3d 1229 (Neb. 2019).

Opinion

135 Nev., Advance Opinion I IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

VEGAS UNITED INVESTMENT No. 74163 SERIES 105, INC., A NEVADA DOMESTIC CORPORATION, Appellant, vs. CELTIC BANK CORPORATION, FILED SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO DEC 1 9 2919 SILVER STATE BANK BY ACQUISITION OF ASSETS FROM THE SU COURr

FDIC AS RECEIVER FOR SILVER BY DEPUTY CLERK STATE BANK, A UTAH BANKING CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND IN GOOD STANDING WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF UTAH, Respondent.

Appeal from a district court judgment following a bench trial in a judicial foreclosure action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Susan Johnson, Judge. Affirmed.

Roger P. Croteau & Associates, Ltd., and Roger P. Croteau and Timothy E. Rhoda, Las Vegas, for Appellant.

Sylvester & Polednak, Ltd., and Allyson R. Noto and Kelly L. Schmitt, Las Vegas, for Respondent.

BEFORE HARDESTY, STIGLICH and SILVER, JJ. SUPREME Cam- OF NEMO*

(0) 1947A aarto /1-5131,3 OPINION

By the Court, STIGLICH, J.: NRS Chapter 116 codifies the Uniform Common-Interest Ownership Act and sets forth statutory regulations applying to common- interest communities in Nevada, such as property owners associations (P0As). NRS Chapter 116 generally applies to all residential Nevada POAs—i.e., homeowners' associations (HOAs)—but does not automatically apply to nonresidential POAs. Nonresidential POAs may elect to apply such provisions by expressly incorporating NRS Chapter 116s provisions, either in whole or in part. As this incorporation is elective, NRS Chapter 116 applies to nonresidential POAs only to the extent provided for by the incorporated statutory provisions. Here, the conditions, covenants, and restrictions (CC&Rs) of the subject nonresidential property state that the association may enforce delinquent assessment liens pursuant to NRS 116.3116-.31168. The CC&Rs only incorporated NRS 116.3116-.31168,1 however, and not the entirety of NRS Chapter 116. Specifically, the CC&Rs did not incorporate the provisions that might invalidate a mortgage savings clause or provide for assessments supporting a lien that would have superpriority status. Appellant Vegas United Investment Series 105, Inc., purchased the

1The 2015 Legislature substantially revised NRS 116.3116-.31168. 2015 Nev. Stat., ch. 266, §§ 1-7, 9, at 1333-45, 1349. Any discussion in this opinion regarding these statutes as they applied to the nonjudicial foreclosure sale here refers to the version of statutes in effect before those amendments, when the foreclosure sale took place. See Saticoy Bay LLC Series 350 Durango 104 v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 133 Nev. 28, 28 n.2, 388 P.3d 970, 971 n.2 (2017). SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947À property at a foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to the procedures set forth in NRS 116.3116 in foreclosing on delinquent POA assessment liens. Because the lien did not have a superpriority portion and the mortgage savings clause, which provided that foreclosure on a delinquent assessment lien would not affect the priority of a prior mortgage, was still valid, respondent Celtic Bank's existing mortgage on the subject property was not extinguished. The district court therefore reached the correct outcome when it determined that Vegas United took the property subject to Celtic Bank's interest, and we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 2005, nonparty Gibson Road, LLC, borrowed $748,000 from Celtic Bank's predecessor-in-interest in order to buy commercial property located in Henderson, Nevada. Gibson Road executed a first priority deed of trust to secure payment of the note. The note and deed of trust were assigned to Celtic Bank in 2009. The property purchased is located within two common-interest communities (CICs) that encompass the same business park, Gibson Business Park Property Owners Association (Park POA) and Gibson Business Center Property Owner's Association, Inc. (Center POA), each of which has adopted CC&Rs. Center POA adopted CC&Rs in 2004.2 Gibson Road failed to pay both its POA assessments and its mortgage. In 2011, Center POA's agent Red Rock Financial Services

2Park POA separately adopted CC&Rs in 1989 and amended them in 1994. Its CC&Rs are not at issue here.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 3 recorded a lien for delinquent assessments and then a notice of default.3 In February 2014, Red Rock recorded and posted a notice of foreclosure sale, announcing a March 2014 sale date. Vegas United was the high bidder at the nonjudicial foreclosure sale with a bid of $30,000. In March 2015, Celtic Bank recorded a notice of default for nonpayment of mortgage payments and subsequently filed a complaint for judicial foreclosure of the property. Vegas United counterclaimed to quiet title, alleging that the nonjudicial foreclosure extinguished Celtic Bank's deed of trust, and asserted a slander of title claim. The district court conducted a bench trial and entered a judgment in favor of Celtic Bank. The district court ruled that the CC&Rs incorporated the procedures for enforcing delinquent assessment liens from NRS 116.3116-.31168 but not the substantive provisions pertaining to the priorities of competing security interests. Accordingly, the district court concluded that the foreclosure sale did not extinguish Celtic Bank's deed of trust and that the Bank was entitled to foreclose on its first security interest. Vegas United now appeals. DISCUSSION Vegas United argues on appeal that the 2014 nonjudicial foreclosure was conducted pursuant to the 2004 CC&Rs and NRS 116.3116- .31168, the delinquent assessment lien accordingly had superpriority

3The lien referenced CC&Rs with instrument number 1994024000285, which does not correspond with any recorded CC&Rs in Nevada. The 1994 amendment to Park PONs CC&Rs has instrument number 19941024000285. As we resolve this appeal on other grounds, we do not address whether this error affected the adequacy of the notice provided or the validity of the foreclosure sale.

(0) 1947A 40, status, the CC&Rs mortgage savings clause was unenforceable as a matter of law, and Center POA's nonjudicial foreclosure sale therefore extinguished Celtic Bank's deed of trust.4 Following a bench trial, we review the district court's legal conclusions de novo and uphold its factual findings so long as they are not clearly erroneous and are supported by substantial evidence. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Radecki, 134 Nev. 619, 621, 426 P.3d 593, 596 (2018). The CC&Rs partially incorporated provisions from NRS Chapter 116 We use the rules governing contract interpretation to interpret a CIC's declaration of its CC&Rs. Diaz v. Ferne, 120 Nev. 70, 73, 84 P.3d 664, 665-66 (2004). When the facts are not disputed, contract interpretation is subject to de novo review as a question of law. Id. at 73, 84 P.3d at 666. "Contractual provisions should be harmonized whenever possible,"Eversole v. Sunrise Villas VIII Homeowners Ass'n, 112 Nev. 1255, 1260,

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NV 61, 453 P.3d 1229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vegas-united-inv-series-105-inc-vs-celtic-bank-corp-nev-2019.