Woodlands Comm. Bank v. State of Nev. Bd. of Finance ( 2015 )

 Provider's rating. See Beal, 865 N.E.2d at 1213 ("A reading of the contract
should not render any portion meaningless.").
The district court therefore properly granted summary
judgment in favor of respondents. 1 See Lake Constr. & Dev. Corp., 621
N.Y.S.2d at 338. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Saitta
cc: Hon. James E. Wilson, District Judge
Ara H Shirinian, Settlement Judge
Ballard Spahr, LLP
Attorney General/Carson City
Attorney General/Las Vegas
Carson City Clerk
'In light of the parties' contract, summary judgment was also proper
with respect to appellant's claim for unjust enrichment. See Leasepartners
Corp. v. Robert L. Brooks Trust Dated November 12, 1975, 113 Nev. 747,
755-56, 942 P.2d 182, 187 (1997) ("An action based on a theory of unjust
enrichment is not available when there is an express, written contract,
because no agreement can be implied when there is an express
agreement"); see also PRG Brokerage Inc. v. Aramarine Brokerage, Inc.,
968 N.Y.S.2d 439, 441 (App. Div. 2013) (same).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A e