Janet Winter v. Stearns Lending, Inc.

Good Law
617 F. App'x 799
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 25, 201512-15576California390 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Janet N. Winter appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her diversity action alleging state law claims arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In re Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 754 F.3d 772, 780 (9th Cir.2014). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Winter’s claim for wrongfulforeclosure because Winter failed to allege facts sufficient to show a lack of default. See id. at 785 (“Nevada law requires that a trustor or mortgagor show a lack of default in order to proceed with a wrongful foreclosure claim.”). Moreover, Winter’s contention that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.’s (“MERS”) involvement rendered the assignment of the deed of trust and note invalid is foreclosed by Nevada law. See Edelstein v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, — Nev. —, 286 P.3d 249, 259-60 (2012) (holding that MERS is capable of being a valid beneficiary of a deed of trust, and that “while entitlement to enforce both the deed of trust and the promissory note is required to foreclose, nothing requires those documents to be unified…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.