Bank of New York Mellon v. Mews Homeowners Association et al
Bank Of New York Mellon |
Homeowner Association Services, Inc., Mews Homeowners Association and Vegas Property Services, Inc. |
Homeowner Association Services, Inc. |
Mews Homeowners Association |
2:2017cv00473 |
February 14, 2017 |
US District Court for the District of Nevada |
Las Vegas Office |
Kent J. Dawson |
Peggy A. Leen |
Real Property: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 70 ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that Mews Homeowners Association shall file a status report or notice of voluntary dismissal regarding its outstanding crossclaims against Homeowner Association Services within fourteen days of the entry of this order. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 10/9/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 66 ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 48 plaintiff BNY Mellon's countermotion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 46 defendant Saticoy Bay, LLC's motion to dismiss is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 61 defendant the Mews Homeowners Association's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART as to BNY Mellons claim for quiet title and declaratory relief. BNY Mellon's remaining claims for breach of NRS § 116.3116 and wrongf ul foreclosure are DISMISSED AS MOOT because they were contingent upon BNY Mellon's quiet title claim. The Clerk of the Court shall ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of BNY Mellon and against Saticoy Bay, LLC on its quiet title claim. It shall also ENTER JUDGMENT in favor of the Mews Homeowners Association and against BNY Mellon on its quiet title claim. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 9/9/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 45 ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 42 Defendant's Motion to Lift Stay is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that stipulations, motions to modify the discovery plan and scheduling order, or in the absence of such stipulations or motions, dispositive motions are due within forty-five (45) days after the entry of this order. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 10/18/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 44 ORDER Granting 43 Motion to Remove Attorney from Electronic Service List. Charles L. Geisendorf, Esq. terminated. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 10/9/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 41 ORDER Granting 40 Motion to Substitute Attorney. Michael F. Bohn is substituted in the place of Charles L. Geisendorf for defendant Saticoy Bay LLC Series 1218 Coach, subject to the provisions of LR IA 11-6(b), (c) and (d). Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/2/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 37 ORDER Granting 36 Motion to Substitute Attorney. Charles L. Geisendorf of Geisendorf & Vilkin is substituted in the place of Michael Bohn of the Law Offices of Michael F. Bohn for Defendant Saticoy Bay LLC Series 1218 Coach, subject to the provisions of LR IA 11-6(c) and (d). Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/7/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 34 ORDER Granting 32 Stipulation to Stay. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 6/26/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Filing 22 ORDER Granting 15 Motion to Substitute Parties. Saticoy Bay LLC added. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 5/22/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.