Before the Court en banc. Opinion by Justice Gibbons.
In this appeal from a district court order denying judicial review of a foreclosure mediation matter, the Court resolved the issue of whether a signed agreement resulting from Nevada’s Foreclosure Mediation Program (FMP) is an enforceable settlement agreement. In answering the question in the affirmative, the Court held that when the agreement is reached during the FMP, the document is signed by both parties, and the document otherwise comports with contract principles, the agreement is enforceable under District Court Rule 16. After participating in the FMP, the Appellant and Respondent entered into a settlement agreement calling for the short sale of the property at issue in exchange for a temporary suspension of Respondent’s foreclosure efforts. The Appellant contended that the agreement was not supported by consideration, and the Court rejected this view, instead holding that the Respondent’s agreement to temporarily suspend foreclosure proceedings was adequate consideration given in exchange for the Appellant’s promise to complete a short sale of the property within two months of the execution of the agreement. The Court further rejected the Appellant’s argument that the Respondent’s subsequent foreclosure of the property after failed short sale efforts violated the Foreclosure Mortgage Rules (FMR). Because the settlement agreement was enforceable and consistent with District Court Rule 16 as well as the FMR, the Respondent was entitled to foreclosure on the property after the Appellant failed to short sell it within the two-month period. Affirmed. (Rory T. Kay, Associate in the Las Vegas office of McDonald Carano Wilson LLP)
