interpretation of the controlling law and did not reach the other issues colorably asserted. Accordingly, we REVERSE the order granting the motions to dismiss AND REMAND this matter to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.

,J.

Hardest

1#74 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 First Horizon 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.

cc: Hon. Douglas Smith, District Judge Maier Gutierrez Ayon, PLLC Akerman LLP/Las Vegas McCarthy & Holthus, LLP/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1.947A Aro>