Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Rose, Llc., V. Treasure Island, Llc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Jun. 6, 2019), Ben Coonan
Rose, Llc., V. Treasure Island, Llc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Jun. 6, 2019), Ben Coonan
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found that (1) strict compliance with contract notice requirements is unnecessary if the defaulting party receives actual notice and no prejudice resulted from failure to comply strictly with the contract terms; and (2) a party is not necessary under NRCP 19 unless the other parties to the litigation cannot obtain complete relief in that party’s absence.
Boesiger V. Desert Appraisals, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 25 (July 3, 2019), Jeff Garrett
Boesiger V. Desert Appraisals, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 25 (July 3, 2019), Jeff Garrett
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that Appellants provided insufficient evidence to show that Respondents had a duty to Appellant or breached their duty to Appellant. The Appellants failed to provide the required expert testimony necessary for a case concerning the professional conduct of a profession whose standards and procedures are not known to the public. Additionally, because the contract between the Appellants and the Respondents did not expressly name the Appellants as third-party beneficiaries, the Appellants do not have standing to request the contract be enforced.
Mmawc, Llc V. Zion Wood Obi Wan Trust, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 38 (Sep. 5, 2019), John Mccormick-Huhn
Mmawc, Llc V. Zion Wood Obi Wan Trust, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 38 (Sep. 5, 2019), John Mccormick-Huhn
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted NRS § 597.995, which required any agreement containing an arbitration provision to also provide affirmative authorization to the arbitration by the agreement’s parties.
Pardee Homes Of Nevada V. Wolfram, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (July 3, 2019), Michael Desmond
Pardee Homes Of Nevada V. Wolfram, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (July 3, 2019), Michael Desmond
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) any party seeking attorney fees as special damages must comply with NRCP 9(g), (2) the prevailing party in a two-party breach of contract suit is not entitled to attorney fees as special damages, and (3) any party seeking attorney fees pursuant to express contractual provisions is so entitled upon prevailing in the suit.