Drysdale Court Trust v. Bank of America ( 2014 )

 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
2
(0) 1947A 4)14094/