Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. THUNDER PROPERTIES, INC., Defendant-Appellant, Esplanade at Damonte Ranch Homeowners Association; ATC Assessment Collection Group, LLC, aka Angius & Terry Collections, LLC, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ***
Appellant Thunder Properties, Inc. (“Thunder”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of appellee Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) on BANA’s action to quiet title to a property in Reno, Nevada (the “Property”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment. See Barnes v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 934 F.3d 901, 906 (9th Cir. 2019). We affirm.
At the time of the 2010 foreclosure sale on the Property, Esplanade at Damonte Ranch Homeowners’ Association (the “HOA”) made clear, as both the foreclosing party and the purchaser at foreclosure, that it was purchasing only the sub-priority portion of its homeowners’ association lien. Because the intent of the parties dictates the extent of the estate conveyed, see City Motel, Inc. v. State ex rel. State Dep’t of Highways, 75 Nev. 137, 336 P.2d 375, 377 (1959), amendment of the foreclosure deed in 2013 did not expand the HOA’s rights in the property to include the super-priority portion of the lien. Accordingly, the district court properly concluded that BANA’s priority position as the holder of the deed of trust was never extinguished, and Thunder purchased the property subject to the deed of trust.
The district court also correctly concluded that Thunder is not a bona fide purchaser for value without notice. Given the plain terms of the initial foreclosure deed, Thunder was on at least inquiry notice that it was purchasing subject to the deed of trust. See Allison Steel Mfg. Co. v. Bentonite, Inc., 86 Nev. 494, 471 P.2d 666, 668–69 (1970).
The Court has considered Thunder’s remaining arguments and finds them to be without merit.
AFFIRMED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-16577
Decided: January 31, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)