Carlini v. Richland Holdings ( 2015 )

 issues de novo, looking to the language of the agreement and the
surrounding circumstances").
Appellant further contends that respondent lacked standing to
file the underlying action. The record on appeal demonstrates, however,
that Najjar assigned her interest in the contract to respondent, and thus,
we conclude that respondent had standing to file the action. See Easton
Bus. Opportunities, Inc. v. Town Exec. Suites-E. Marketplace, LLC, 126
Nev. 119, 124, 230 P.3d 827, 830 (2010) (recognizing that a contract "is
assignable unless assignment materially changes the terms of the contract
or the contract expressly precludes assignment"). Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.'
Saitta
Atieu Cup J.
Pickering
cc: Hon. Gloria Sturman, District Judge
Trent Carlini
Bowen Law Offices
Eighth District Court Clerk
'We conclude that appellant's additional arguments lack merit.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A cep