Ethicare Revenue Cycle Mgmt., Inc. v. Boulder City Hospital, Inc. ( 2015 )

 the contract also required respondent to "afford its best efforts in
rebilling," respondent presented evidence that it made a cost-benefit
assessment and determined that rebilling would not be feasible, making
summary judgment proper on appellant's breach of contract and bad faith
claims, which were grounded on respondent's decision not to rebill. 1 And
because the parties had a valid written contract, summary judgment was
also appropriate on appellant's unjust enrichment claim. Leasepartners
Corp. v. Robert L. Brooks Trust, 113 Nev. 747, 755, 942 P.2d 182, 187
(1997) (noting that "[a]n action based on a theory of unjust enrichment is
not available when there is an express, written contract"). Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Anit
Parraguirre
Douglas Cherry
cc: Hon. Kenneth C. Cory, District Judge
Stephen E. Haberfeld, Settlement Judge
Law Office of Malik W. Ahmad
Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Little
Eighth District Court Clerk
1 We likewise are not persuaded by appellant's alternative argument
that the contract was ambiguous by virtue of giving respondent both the
discretion to rebill and requiring it to use its best efforts. Galardi, 129
Nev. Adv. Op. 33, 301 P.3d at 366 (noting that a contract will not be
considered ambiguous "simply because the parties disagree on how to
interpret" it).
We have considered appellant's remaining arguments and conclude
that they do not warrant reversal.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A e