REVERSE the order granting the motion to dismiss AND REMAND this matter to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.

,J.

Hardesty

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 Deutsche Bank 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. Michael Villani, District Judge Law Offices of Michael F. Bohn, Ltd. Akerman LLP/Las Vegas Kravitz, Schnitzer & Johnson, Chtd.

Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A