the controlling law and did not reach the other issues colorably asserted.

Accordingly, we REVERSE the order granting the motion to dismiss AND REMAND for proceedings consistent with this order.

Pickering

J.

PARRAGUIRRE, J., concurring: For the reasons stated in the SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 130 Nev. 334 P.3d 408 (2014), dissent, I disagree that respondent lost its lien priority by virtue of the homeowners association's nonjudicial foreclosure sale. I recognize, however, that SFR Investments is now the controlling law and, thusly, concur in the disposition of this appeal.

J.

Parra guirre

cc: Hon. Valorie J. Vega, District Judge Greene Infuso, LLP Akerman LLP/Las Vegas Miles, Bauer, Bergstrom & Winters, LLP Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 4)14094/