In an opinion drafted by Justice Stiglich, the Court considered whether HOA’s have a statutory duty to record whether tender of a superpriority portion of their lien on a property was made when the Legislature amended NRS 116.31164. Saticoy Bay alleged that (1) if it had been permitted to pursue a claim, it could have produced evidence that Red Rock or Spanish Trail misrepresented that a tender had not been made and (2) that Spanish Trail had a statutory duty to proactively record BANA’s tender. The Court dismissed these arguments and found that the district court did not err by awarding the property’s previous owner the excess proceeds from the sale, thus awarding the HOA agent the attorney fees and costs it incurred in connection with the sale. The Court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the subsequent purchaser’s motion for reconsideration, affirming the district court’s judgment in full.
Martinez, Servando, "Saticoy Bay, LLC Ser. 34 Innisbrook v. Thornburg Motrg. Sec. TR. 2007-3, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 35 (May 26, 2022)" (2022). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1505.