Eva Futch v. Bac Home Loans Servicing

MEMORANDUM

Eva M. Futch appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her diversity action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th Cir.1986). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Futch’s wrongful foreclosure and quiet title claims because Futch did not allege facts showing that she was not in default on her loan when defendants initiated non judicial foreclosure proceedings. See Breliant v. Preferred Equities Corp., 112 Nev. 663 , 918 P.2d 314, 318 (1996) (per curiam) (“In a quiet title action, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff to prove good title in himself.”); Collins v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 99 Nev. 284 , 662 P.2d 610, 623 (1983) (wrongful foreclosure claim requires allegation that a lender exercised the power of sale and foreclosed upon property when no failure of performance existed on the part of the borrower).

The district court properly dismissed Futch’s civil conspiracy and injunctive and declaratory relief claims after dismissing the underlying causes of action. See, e.g., Eikelberger v. Tolotti, 96 Nev. 525 , 611…