Tallard CT Trust v. Southern Highlands Community Association, 011521 NVSC, 79252

Docket Nº79252
Party NameTALLARD CT TRUST, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Respondent.
Judge PanelParraguirre, Stiglich, Silver, Judges Hon. Richard Scotti, District Judge Kathleen J. England, Settlement Judge
Case DateJanuary 15, 2021
CourtSupreme Court of Nevada

TALLARD CT TRUST, Appellant,

v.

SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Respondent.

No. 79252

Supreme Court of Nevada

January 15, 2021

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a district court order granting a motion to dismiss in a tort and contract action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Richard Scotti, Judge.1

Having considered the parties' arguments and the record, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed appellant's complaint. See Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of N. Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 228, 181 P.3d 670, 672 (2008) (reviewing de novo a district court's NRCP 12(b)(5) dismissal and recognizing that dismissal is appropriate when "it appears beyond a doubt that [the plaintiff] could prove no set of facts, which, if true, would entitle [the plaintiff] to relief). In particular, dismissal of appellant's breach-of-contract claim was appropriate because appellant's complaint failed to allege the existence of a contract between appellant and respondent. See Saavedra-Sandoval v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 126 Nev. 592, 599, 245 P.3d 1198, 1202 (2010) (recognizing that this court may affirm the district court on any ground supported by the record, even if not relied upon by the district court). The HOA foreclosure process is governed strictly by statute, not by two parties entering into negotiations that are consummated by written agreement. See generally NRS 116.3116-.3117. Furthermore, a foreclosure deed is an instrument by which land is conveyed, not an enforceable contract between two parties. See Deed, Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) (providing that a deed is a "written instrument by which land is conveyed"). Appellant's reliance on the foreclosure auction process and the foreclosure deed for its allegation that a contract existed between the two parties is therefore misguided.2 Accordingly, we determine that appellant inadequately alleged the existence of a contract-the quintessential requirement for a breach-of-contract claim. See Richardson v. Jones, 1 Nev. 405, 408 (1865) (establishing that a plaintiff must prove the existence of a contract in a breach-of-contract claim). Appellant therefore did not state a viable claim for breach of contract.

We next conclude that appellant failed to state a viable claim for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing because such duty presupposes the existence of a...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP