Charlene Azucena v. Aztec Foreclosure Corporation

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Azucena seeks review of both the district court’s denial of her motion to remand and its dismissal of her complaint. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we vacate the district court’s dismissal of Azucena’s complaint, and remand for the district court to determine if the unlawful detainer action remains pending in state court, and for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.

Although Azucena’s complaint alleges three claims, her quiet title action is the gravamen of her complaint. “The nature of [her] claim does not change because [she] requests] monetary damages in addition to the central relief — quiet title— that [she] requests].” Chapman v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. (Chapman II), 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 , 302 P.3d 1103, 1107 (Nev.2013). We therefore treat Azucena’s action as a quiet title action.

Under the prior exclusive jurisdiction doctrine “when one court is exercising in rem jurisdiction over a res, a second court will not assume in rem jurisdiction over the same res.” Chapman v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 651 F.3d 1039, 1043 (Chapman I) (9th Cir.2011) (quoting Marshall v. Marshall, 547 U.S. 293, 311 , 126…