Emanuel v. Bank of Las Vegas C/W 61812 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                     contractor for respondent's approval)    See Cuzze v. Univ. & Cmty. Coll.
    Sys. of Nev., 
    123 Nev. 598
    , 602-03, 
    172 P.3d 131
    , 134 (2007) (noting that
    when the nonmoving party bears the burden of persuasion at trial, the
    moving party may demonstrate that summary judgment is appropriate by
    "pointing out. .. that there is an absence of evidence to support the
    nonmoving party's case" (internal quotation omitted)).
    As for the deficiency judgment, we conclude that substantial
    evidence supported the district court's determination that respondent
    mitigated its damages.     See Mason-McDuffie Real Estate, Inc. v. Villa
    Fiore Dev., LLC, 
    130 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 83
    , 
    335 P.3d 211
    , 213-14 (2014)
    (recognizing that this court will not disturb a district court's factual
    findings that are supported by substantial evidence); see also Sheehan &
    Sheehan v. Nelson Malley & Co., 
    121 Nev. 481
    , 492, 
    117 P.3d 219
    , 226
    (2005) (noting that the party asserting a failure-to-mitigate-damages
    defense bears the burden to prove that damages might have been lessened
    by "reasonable diligence on the part of the aggrieved party" (internal
    quotation omitted)). In particular, evidence was presented from which it
    was reasonable for the district court to conclude that appellant's proposed
    mitigation strategies were not practicable.      See Mason-McDuffie Real
    Estate, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 83, 335 P.3d at 214 (indicating that substantial
    evidence is "that which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
    support a conclusion" (internal quotation omitted)).
    'To the extent that appellant has made arguments on appeal based
    on evidence that was procured after summary judgment was granted, we
    have not considered those arguments. Old Aztec Mine, Inc. v. Brown, 
    97 Nev. 49
    , 52, 
    623 P.2d 981
    , 983 (1981).
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) 1947A    eia>
    Consistent with the foregoing, we affirm the judgment in
    Docket No. 61812. In light of our disposition of the appeal in Docket No.
    61812, we affirm the award of attorney fees and costs appealed in Docket
    No. 62478.
    It is so ORDERED.
    J.
    cc: Hon. Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, District Judge
    Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge
    David J. Winterton & Associates, Ltd.
    Holland & Hart LLP/Las Vegas
    Eighth District Court Clerk
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    3
    (0) 1947A en
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 61812

Filed Date: 5/20/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021