Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Mardian V. Greenberg Family Trust, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Sep. 24, 2015), Colton Loretz Sep 2015

Mardian V. Greenberg Family Trust, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Sep. 24, 2015), Colton Loretz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court concluded that the promissory note, which had security interest by both a deed of trust of Arizona real property and personal guaranties, was governed by Nevada limitations period because of the Nevada choice-of-law provision within the contract. Consequently, the Court held that the party seeking deficiency judgment was time-barred pursuant to NRS 40.455(1) because the judgment was not sought within six months of the foreclosure sale of the collateral property.


In Re: Manhattan West Mechanic’S Lien Litigation, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 70 (Sept. 24, 2015), Kristian Kaskla Sep 2015

In Re: Manhattan West Mechanic’S Lien Litigation, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 70 (Sept. 24, 2015), Kristian Kaskla

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) a general subordination agreement effects a partial subordination; and (2) NRS 108.225 does not preclude parties from contracting for a partial subordination.


Land Baron Invs. V. Bonnie Springs Family Lp, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 69 (Sept. 17, 2015), Rob Schmidt Sep 2015

Land Baron Invs. V. Bonnie Springs Family Lp, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 69 (Sept. 17, 2015), Rob Schmidt

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case is an appeal arising from a failed land sale contract. The Court considered three issues of first impression, holding that (1) when a party bears the risk, mutual mistake is not a basis for rescission; (2) an abuse of process claim may not be supported by a complaint to an administrative agency; (3) a nuisance claim seeking only emotional distress damages must be supported by proof of physical harm. Ultimately, The Court affirmed in part and reversed in part.


Double Diamond V. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (July 30, 2015), Janine Lee Jul 2015

Double Diamond V. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (July 30, 2015), Janine Lee

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 116.3105(2) permits homeowners associations to terminate contracts at any time if the declarant did not enter into the contract in good faith or if the contract was unconscionable to the units’ owners at the time of contract formation.[1] The statute requires that an association provide at least 90 days notice of termination under this provision. The 90-day notice period in NRS 116.3105(2) does not operate as a statute of limitations nor does it shift the burden to a notice recipient to file an action. Instead, NRS 11.190 is applicable, resulting in either a four-year or six-year statute of …


Summary Of Dep't Of Taxation V. Kawahara., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (June 25, 2015), Janine Lee Jun 2015

Summary Of Dep't Of Taxation V. Kawahara., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (June 25, 2015), Janine Lee

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A recorded tax lien has the effect of a judgment lien under NRS 360.473(2) and therefore, cannot have the effect or priority of a mortgage lien. The common law rule of “first in time, first in right” applies to lien priority when a valid deed of trust is attached to a property, thus creating a security interest, prior to the recording of a tax lien; even if not recorded until after the tax lien.


Summary Of Branch Banking & Trust V. Windhaven & Tollway, Llc, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (Apr. 30, 2015), Joseph Meissner Apr 2015

Summary Of Branch Banking & Trust V. Windhaven & Tollway, Llc, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (Apr. 30, 2015), Joseph Meissner

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined the proper interpretation of NRS 40.455(1), and applied it in a claim for a deficiency judgment following an out-of-state nonjudicial foreclosure. NRS 40.455(1) “does not require an out-of-state trustee’s sale to comply with NRS 107.080, nor does it preclude a deficiency judgment in Nevada when a nonjudicial foreclosure sale is conducted pursuant to the laws of another state.”