IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, A No. 64590 NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Appellant, vs. FILED WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., A NOV 1 4 2014 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION; AND THR TRADE K. LINDEMAN NEVADA II, LP, A DELAWARE CLERK OF - UPREME COURT EY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, DEPUTY CLERK Resnondents.

ORDER OF REVERSAL AND REMAND This is an appeal from an order granting a motion to dismiss in a quiet title and wrongful foreclosure action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Stefany Miley, Judge.

Appellant purchased the subject property at Sunrise Highlands Community Association's foreclosure sale, conducted to enforce Sunrise Highlands' delinquent assessment lien. Thereafter, respondent Wells Fargo held a trustee's sale and the property was conveyed to respondent THR Nevada II, LP. Appellant subsequently filed the underlying action against respondents, seeking to quiet title in appellant's name and a declaration that Wells Fargo's sale to THR was invalid. The district court granted respondents' motion to dismiss, finding that appellant had failed to state a viable claim for relief because NRS 116.3116(2)'s superpriority provision "only creates a priority to payment from foreclosure proceeds," and alternatively, because the statute "refers to a judicial foreclosure action and is not applicable when the home owner's association forecloses under the non-judicial foreclosure statutes." This court's recent disposition in SFR Investments Pool 1, .LLC v. U.S. SUPREME COURT Bank, N.A., 130 Nev. 334 P.3d 408 (2014), decides that a common- OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 4401 )04 'OS interest community association's NRS 116.3116(2) superpriority lien has true priority over a first security interest, and the association may nonjudicially foreclose on that lien. 1 The district court's decision thus was based on an erroneous interpretation of the controlling law and did not reach the other issues colorably asserted. Accordingly, we REVERSE the order granting the motion to dismiss AND REMAND this matter to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.

,--L Hardest J.

J.

Douglas

CHERRY, 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 Wells Fargo 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.

'We have considered THR's "inferior title" and "purchase money mortgage" arguments and conclude that they do not provide a viable basis for affirming the district court's order.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A me cc: Hon. Stefany Miley, District Judge Howard Kim & Associates Hutchison & Steffen, LLC Akerman LLP/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A e