Click to Chat

Complaint to Quiet Title and for Summary Eviction

Posted by: on Sat, Jan 18, 2014

Share this post

COMP

 

G. MARK ALBRIGHT, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 001394

WILLIAM H. STODDARD, JR., ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 008679

ALBRIGHT, STODDARD, WARNICK & ALBRIGHT

801 South Rancho Drive, Suite D-4

Las Vegas, Nevada  89106

Tel: (702) 384-7111

Fax: (702) 384-0605

gma@albrightstoddard.com

bstoddard@albrightstoddard.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

 

DISTRICT COURT

CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

 

BRENDA KEEM YOUNG, an individual,

Plaintiff,

vs.

VIRGIL K. BRASHEAR, an individual; DANIELLE BRASHEAR, an individual; and DAWN PHILLIPS, an individual,

Defendants.

CASE NO.

DEPT NO.

 

VERIFIED COMPLAINT

 

Exempt from Arbitration:  Issues involve real property; summary eviction,  amount in controversy exceeds $40,000; and allegations of fraud are alleged.

COMES NOW, Plaintiff, BRENDA KEEM YOUNG, an individual, by and through her undersigned counsel of record, ALBRIGHT, STODDARD, WARNICK & ALBRIGHT, and for her causes of action complain and allege against the Defendants VIRGIL K. BRASHEAR, an individual; DANIELLE BRASHEAR, an individual; and DAWN PHILLIPS, an individual (hereinafter collectively the “Defendants”) as follows:

PROPERTY/PREMISES

This litigation, in part, concerns certain real property and improvements thereon (hereinafter the “Property and Premises”), located at two separate locations:  (1) 66 Oklahoma Drive, Henderson, Nevada, further identified as Clark County Parcel No. 179-18-710-135, and parcel (2) located at 232 Piute Lane, Henderson, Nevada and further identified as Clark County Parcel No. 179-05-813-078.

PARTIES

At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff, BRENDA KEEM YOUNG (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), is an individual residing in the State of Nevada, County of Clark.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and therein alleges that at all times relevant to this action Defendant, VIRGIL K. BRASHEAR (hereinafter “Virgil”) is a resident of the State of Nevada, County of Clark, residing at 66 Oklahoma Drive, Henderson, Nevada (the “Oklahoma Drive” property).

Plaintiff is informed and believes and therein alleges that at all times relevant to this action Defendant, DANIELLE BRASHEAR (hereinafter “Danielle”) is a resident of the State of Nevada, County of Clark.

Plaintiff is informed and believes and therein alleges that at all times relevant to this action Defendant, DAWN PHILLIPS (hereinafter “Dawn”) is a resident of the State of Nevada, County of Clark, residing in the property located at 232 Piute Lane, Henderson, Nevada (the “Piute Lane” property).

The causes of action of action relating to the use and occupancy of the Property/ Premises

 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

 

The Judicial District Court of Clark County, Nevada has plenary authority to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over this first cause of action for unlawful detainer and summary eviction because Plaintiff seeks damages and restitution from the first cause of action Defendants arising from their unlawful detainer and use and occupancy of the Property and Premises specified hereinbelow, for an amount in excess of $10,000.

As such, the amount in controversy implicated by the unlawful detainer and summary eviction exceeds the jurisdictional maximum limits of the Justice Court of the Las Vegas Township and the Justice Court for the Henderson Township of Las Vegas, Nevada.

Plaintiff is the owner and landlord of the Property and the Premises, both the Colorado Drive property and the Piute Lane property.

For good and valuable consideration, a Quitclaim Deed to the Oklahoma property was signed and delivered by Virgil and recorded on December 18, 2007 as Instrument No. 20071218-0003749 conveying and vesting the property in the name of Plaintiff, BRENDA KEEM YOUNG.

For good and valuable consideration, a Quitclaim Deed was signed, delivered and recorded on February 23, 2007 conveying title to the Piute Lane property to Plaintiff as Instrument No. 20070223-0004814.

In consideration for Plaintiff paying in excess of $60,000 to the IRS to help satisfy Virgil Brashears’ federal tax obligations, Defendant Virgil conveyed to Plaintiff both the Oklahoma Drive property and the Piute Lane property.

In early 2012, the Defendant, Virgil K. Brashear, approached Plaintiff and engaged Plaintiff in a verbal and physical altercation.

Defendant Virgil assaulted Plaintiff by repeatedly showing and otherwise touching her and intentionally placing Plaintiff in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm and/or death.

Defendant Virgil pushed the Plaintiff to the floor and pulled out a knife and demanded that the Plaintiff comply with his demands and to provide him of all of her keys.

Defendant Virgil then placed his foot on the back of the Plaintiff’s neck on the floor, pulled her head back and tried to break her neck.

Defendant Virgil then turned Plaintiff around and began slapping the Plaintiff’s face with his foot on Plaintiff’s neck, threatening to kill her.

Defendant Virgil then, with a knife, cut the straps to Plaintiff’s purse to steal her belongings and keys, and threatened to kill her.

When the Defendant Virgil attacked Plaintiff in a physical altercation, threw her to the ground, placing his foot on her neck, threatening to kill her with a knife and slapping her face, he continued to batter Plaintiff by repeatedly shoving and touching her thereby willfully and unlawfully using force and violence against the Plaintiff’s body and person.

Plaintiff feared for her life and left Nevada for her own safety.

Plaintiff accepted the two deeds from Virgil, for both the Piute Lane property and the Oklahoma Drive property, for good and valuable consideration (attached as Exhibits “A” and “B”).

The Defendants are using and occupying the Property and Premises as trespassers.

The Defendants, and each of them, used and occupied the Property after their license and permission to do so was terminated as trespassers.

The Defendants’ current use and occupation fo the Property and Premises is without Plaintiff’s authority or permission.

The Defendants have been served by Henderson Constable with notices to vacate the Premises for unlawful detainer.

Attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and Exhibit “D” are the notices to vacate the Oklahoma Drive property.

Attached hereto as Exhibit “E” and “F” are the notices to vacate the Piute Lane property.

 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Unlawfully Detainer and Summary Eviction)

The Defendants, and each of them, are still using and occupying the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is informed and believes now and alleges that the Brashear Defendants have leased the Piute Property to Dawn Phillips and are continuing to collect the rends from Dawn Phillips on the Piute Property.

The Defendants, and each of them, continue to use and occupy the Property and Premises after the unlawful detainer notices were served upon them by the Henderson Constable Office.

The Defendants, and each of them, have not paid any rent to Plaintiff for their use and occupancy of the Property and Premises.

Moreover, none of the Defendants have any authority to collect rent from Dawn Phillips and retain rent relative to the Piute property.

The Defendants, and each of them, have not paid the reasonable rental value to Plaintiff for their use and occupancy of the Oklahoma Drive property and the Piute Lane property.

The Defendants current use and occupation of the Piute Lane property and Oklahoma Drive  property constitutes an unlawful detainer.

Plaintiff is entitled to evict and exclude the Defendants, and each of them, from both the Piute Lane property and the Oklahoma Drive property.

Plaintiff is not required to serve a notice upon the Defendants to quit or vacate the Property and Premises.

Nevertheless, Plaintiff has served a 5-Day Notice to Quit on the Defendants.

Plaintiff is entitled to the ordinary statutory of remedy of eviction and exclusion fo the Defendants, and each of them, from both the Oklahoma property and the Piute property, pursuant to NRS 40.2512 and 40.290 to 40.420, inclusive.

This Honorable Court should issue and execute a writ of restitution that restores the Property and Premises to Plaintiff to the exclusion of all the Defendants, and each them.

Plaintiff is entitled to the supplemental, statutory remedy of summary eviction and exclusion of the Defendants, and each of them, from the Property and Premises and restoration of the same to Plaintiff in accordance with NRS 40.253.

Plaintiff has suffered harm and injury as a result of the Defendants’ use and occupancy of the Oklahoma property and Piute property without permission, consent or authority.

This Court should award equitable restitution and damages in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each of them, arising from their use and occupancy of the Property and Premises in amount to be proven at the time of trial and in an amount in excess of $10,000.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages and compensation against the Defendants, and each them, pursuant to NRS 40.300.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of trouble damages against the Defendants, and each of them, pursuant to NRS 40.150, NRS 40.170, and/or NRS 40.360.

The conduct of the Defendants, and each of them, has required Plaintiff to retain the services of an attorney to vindicate the rights of Plaintiff in this regard.  Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to an ward of attorneys’ fees and costs accordingly.

The culpable conduct of the Defendants, and each of them, for this First Cause of Action has been intentional, willful, oppressive and malicious and warrants the award of exemplary and punitive damages in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time of trial.

 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Unjust Enrichment for Use and Occupancy)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

The rent for use and occupation of the Property and Premises by the Defendants, and each of them, has benefitted the Defendants, and each of them.

It would unjust for the Defendants, and each of them, not to pay to Plaintiff the reasonable rental value of the two Properties and Premises that they have been using for their use and occupancy.

If the Defendants do not pay Plaintiff for their use and occupancy of the Oklahoma property and Piute property, the Defendants, and each of them, will be unjustly enriched.

Plaintiff is entitled to an equitable award of compensation against the Defendants, and each of them, for their use and occupancy of the Property and Premises in an amount to be determined at the time of trial, and in an amount in excess of $10,000.

 

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Restitution)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the Defendants, and each of them, have caused or permitted to be caused property damage and waste to the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the Defendants, and each of them, have caused or permitted to be caused physical changes to the structure and or design of the Property and Premises whether to the grounds, building exterior or building interior.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of restitution from the Defendants, and each of them, for any and all property damage and waste caused or permitted to be caused by the Defendants, and each of them, in an amount to be proven at the time of trial.

 

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Declaratory Judgment/Quite Title)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that a dispute may exist between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, and each of them, concerning the ownership of the Property and Premises.

A cloud now exists to the title to the Property and the Premises.

Plaintiff is entitled by equity to seek a determination by this Court as to the rights and obligations of the parties regarding the ownership of the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is entitled by NRS 40.010 to seek a determination by this Court as the rights and obligations of the parties regarding the ownership of the Property and Premises.

Concurrent with the filing of this Complaint, Plaintiff has caused to be recorded in the Office of the Clark County Recorder a Notice of Dependency of this action, i.e., a Lis Pendens.

Title to the Property and Premises is vested solely in Plaintiff.

Plaintiff is entitled to a declaratory judgment that quiets title in both the Piute Lane property and the Oklahoma Drive property against the Defendants.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs.

The culpable conduct of the Defendants, and each of them, for this Complaint has been intentional, willful, oppressive and malicious, and warrants the award of exemplary and punitive damages in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants to be determined at the time of trial.

 

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Declaratory Judgment Terminating All Unauthorized Lease Agreements)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

A dispute has risen between the parties as to the existing nature and validity of any purported lease agreements, sublease or license entered into by any of the Defendants, particularly with respect to any potential leases with Dawn Phillips with respect to the 232 Piute, Henderson, property.

Plaintiff is entitled to seek declaratory judgment from this Court determining the rights and obligations as between the parties in that regard.

Plaintiff has not entered into an y lease agreements with any of the Defendants for the use or occupancy of the Property or Premises.

The Brashear Defendants upon information and belief, have asserted that they are the landlords of the Property and the Premises entitled to occupancy and/or to lease the same out to third-parties, including Dawn Phillips.

None of the Defendants are the landlord or owner of the Property and Premises.

None of the Defendants are an authorized agent to represent Plaintiff for any purpose.

The Brashear Defendants may have demanded rent and collected rent from Phillips for the use and occupancy of the Piute property.

None of the Defendants have authority from Plaintiff to receive rent from any party who uses and occupies either the Piute property or the Oklahoma property.

The purported lease agreements, if any, for the use and occupancy of the Property and Premises are not enforceable at law and are not enforceable in equity.

Plaintiff is not legally obligation to honor any of the terms of any purported lease agreements for either the Piute Lane property or the Oklahoma Drive property.

Any such lease agreements with respect to either of the properties does not confer any benefit or rights upon the Defendants.

The acts of the Defendants complained of interferes with the Plaintiff’s lawful right to own and occupy and lease the Property and Premises.

The purported lease agreements are void and if not void, they are voidable.

This Honorable Court should issue a judgment declaring the purported lease agreements, if any, to be void, voidable, or terminated.

This Honorable Court should issue a judgment declaring that none of the Defendants is a landlord for the Property and Premises, and they are not agents authorized to speak or act on behalf of the Plaintiff herein.

 

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Equitable Accounting)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the Brashear Defendants may have received, collected, retained and/or detained rent from third-parties including, without limitation, Dawn Phillips with respect to the Piute Lane property.

Plaintiff has not received any rent, viable consideration, or deposits that were received, collected, retained or detained by the Brashear Defendants for the use and occupancy of the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is entitled to an equitable accounting from the Defendants, and each of them, pertaining to any income, rents, deposits or valuable consideration that they received, collected, retained and/or detained or paid for the use and occupancy of the Piute Lane property and/or the Oklahoma Drive property.

The culpable conduct of the Defendants relating to this cause of action has required Plaintiff to retain the services of an attorney to vindicate the rights of Plaintiff in this regard.

Plaintiff is entitled to an equitable award of attorneys’ fees and costs accordingly.

 

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Conversion)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

Plaintiff is entitled to receive any and all income, rent, valuable consideration or deposits generated from the use and occupancy of the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that income rent, valuable consideration, and/or deposits were generated by the use and occupancy of the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the BRASHEAR Defendants have withheld from Plaintiff the income, rent, valuable consideration and/or deposits that were generated by the use and occupancy of the Property and the Premises (hereinafter referred to as the “withheld income”).

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the BRASHEAR Defendants have converted the withheld income to their use and enjoyment to the exclusion of Plaintiff and/or inconsistent with the rights of Plaintiff therein.

Plaintiff is informed, believes and therein alleges that the BRASHEAR Defendants have wrongfully exercised dominion and control over the withheld income to the exclusion of Plaintiff and inconsistent with the rights of Plaintiff.

The acts of the Defendants, and each of them, complained of this cause of action have caused harm and injury to Plaintiff in amount to be determined at the time of trial.

Plaintiff is entitled to receive an award of damages against the Defendants, and each of them, equal to or greater than the value of the withheld income due to the loss of potential income, mortgage payments, lost capital gains, etc.

The culpable conduct of the Defendants in this cause of action has been intentional, willful, oppressive and malicious and warrants the award of exemplary and punitive damages in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants, and each of them, in an amount to be determined at the time of trial.

 

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Assault)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, pain, discomfort, suffering, permanent impairment, emotional distress and anxiety.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff incurred the expenses of necessary medical, rehabilitative and other care, treatment and services.

Although Plaintiff reported the incidents to the local police, the police indicated that under the circumstances, they would not be able to guaranty Plaintiff’s safety and that she should leave town to save her own life.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has suffered the loss and pleasures of life, including but not limited to the participation of life’s activities, the quality and to the extent previously enjoyed by Plaintiff, in the location of her choice.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing threats on her life, and attempts on her life, Plaintiff has experienced sorrow, pain and suffering.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has sustained special and general damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing assault, Plaintiff has suffered damages to the extent she has incurred attorneys’ fees and expenses and will continue to incur future attorneys’ fees and expenses that are presently undetermined.

 

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Battery Against Defendant Virgil K. Brashear)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

As a direct and proximate result fo the foregoing, Plaintiff has suffered bodily injury, pain, discomfort, suffering, impairment, emotional distress, and anxiety.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has incurred expenses for necessary medical, rehabilitative and other care, treatment and medical services.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, the Plaintiff has suffered loss of the pleasures of life, including but not limited to, participation in life’s activities, of the quality and to extent and in the locations previously enjoyed by Plaintiff.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has experienced sorrow, pain and suffering.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has sustained special and general damage in an amount in excess of $10,000.

As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has suffered damages and incurred attorneys’ fees and expenses and will continue to incur future attorneys’ fees and expenses that are presently undetermined.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award thereof and reserves the right to amend this Complaint when such fees and expenses are ascertained.

 

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

 

(Fraud)

Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation above and incorporates such as if fully set forth herein.

In consideration for assisting the Plaintiff in satisfying his federal tax obligations, Defendant Virgil represented to Plaintiff that if Plaintiff would utilize her $60,000 in savings and pay said monies directly to the IRS on Virgil’s behalf, then Virgil would convey to Plaintiff the Oklahoma Drive property and the Piute Lane property, among other properties, the said properties would become her sole and separate property.

In reliance upon said representations, Plaintiff provided to Virgil an amount in excess of $60,000 which was paid directly to the IRS to help satisfy and reduce Virgil’s federal tax obligation to the Internal Revenue Service.

Virgil’s representations were false.

The representations made by Virgil were made with a reckless disregard for the truth of said representations.

Virgil knew that the representations would reasonably induce Plaintiff to convey to Virgil the cash savings of Plaintiff.

Plaintiff did in fact rely on the representations of Virgil.

Plaintiff’s reliance on the representations was justifiable.

Plaintiff’s reliance on the representations of Virgil inured to her detriment and harm.

The acts and omissions of Virgil have caused harm and injury to Plaintiff in amount to be proven at the time of trial, including damages arising from the loss and enjoyment of the Property and Premises.

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of damages against Virgil in an amount in excess of $10,000 to be proven at the time of the trial hereof.

The culpable conduct of Virgil has required Plaintiff to retain the services of an attorney to vindicate the rights of Plaintiff in this regard.  Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and costs accordingly.

The conduct of Defendant Virgil has been reckless and warrants the award of exemplary and punitive damages in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants in an amount to be determined at the time of the trial hereof.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:

A. That this Court entered Judgment against Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally, for the supplemental statutory remedy of summary eviction and exclusion of the Defendants from the Property and the Premises, both at the Piute Lane property and the Oklahoma Drive property, in accordance with NRS 40.253;

B. In the alternative, if summary eviction is not granted, pursuant to NRS 40.253, that this Honorable Court entered Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally, for the ordinary statutory remedy of eviction and exclusion of the Defendants from the Property and Premises and the restoration thereof to Plaintiff, in accordance with NRS 40.2512 and NRS 40.290 through 40.420 inclusive;

C. This Honorable enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally, for damages and pre-judgment interests for the use and occupancy of the Property and the Premises in an amount in excess of $10,000;

D. That this Court enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each of them, jointly and severally, for special consequential and incidental damages, including loss rental income, and expenses incurred as a result of the wrongful use and occupancy of the Property and Premises, including pre-judgment interests for same, in an amount in excess of $10,000;

E. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally, for restitution for property damage to and restoration of the Property and Premises to their original condition in amount in excess of $10,000;

F. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment jointly and severally against the Defendants for statutory damages provided for in NRS 40.300, and for trouble damages provided for in NRS 40.150, NRS 40.170, and/or NRS 4.360 in an amount in excess of $10,000;

G. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each them jointly and severally for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in an amount to be determined at the time of trial;

H. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, and each of them jointly and severally for exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at the time of trial;

I. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment quieting title to both the Piute Lane property and the Oklahoma Drive property in favor of Plaintiff and against all Defendants thereby declaring that title to the Property and Premises is properly and solely vested in the name of Plaintiff, Brenda Keem Young;

J. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment declaring that the purported lease agreements are void;

K. That this Honorable Court enter Judgment for general damages on the personal injury claims for an amount in excess of $10,000; and

L. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem proper in the premises.

DATED this _____ day of January, 2014.

 

ALBRIGHT, STODDARD, WARNICK & ALBRIGHT

 

____________________________________________

G. MARK ALBRIGHT, ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 001394

WILLIAM H. STODDARD, JR., ESQ.

Nevada Bar No. 008679

801 South Rancho Drive, Suite D-4

Las Vegas, Nevada  89106

(702) 384-7111

Attorneys for Plaintiff

 

VERIFICATION

 

STATE OF _____________ )

COUNTY OF ___________ )

Under penalties of perjury, the undersigned BRENDA KEEM YOUNG , hereby declares that she is the Plaintiff named in the foregoing Verified Complaint and knows the contents thereof; that the foregoing Verified Complaint is true of her own knowledge, except as to those matters stated or alleged therein on information and belief, and as to those matters, she believes them to be true.

____________________________________________

BRENDA KEEM YOUNG

SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before

me this _____ day of January, 2013.

________________________________

NOTARY PUBLIC in and for said

County and State

About the Authors: The law firm of Albright, Stoddard, Warnick & Albright is an A-V Rated Nevada-based full-service law firm having attorneys licensed in Nevada, California and Utah. Our firm’s practice includes a strong emphasis on personal injury accidents. Call us at 702-384-7111.

Note: This article, and any other information you obtain at this website, is not offered as legal advice, nor should it be relied upon as such, nor is it a solicitation for legal services. Only a licensed attorney can advise you with respect to your specific legal needs. We welcome your contacting our firm to discuss such representation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.