Schroeder v. Glyman ( 2013 )


Menu:
  • court weighed the appropriate factors, including the length of the delay,
    the effect of the delay on the timely prosecution of the case, and the lack of
    good cause to excuse the delay.' Accordingly, we
    ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
    Gibbons
    Saitta
    cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge
    Stephen E. Haberfeld, Settlement Judge
    Lewis & Associates, LLC
    Hutchison & Steffen, LLC
    Eighth District Court Clerk
    1-To the extent that appellant argues that the district court's
    dismissal of the case was inconsistent with the medical/dental panel's
    conclusion that good cause existed to waive the rule requiring malpractice
    actions to be brought within two years, appellant did not present this
    argument to the district court, and thus, we decline to address it on
    appeal. See Mason v. Cuisenaire, 
    122 Nev. 43
    , 48, 
    128 P.3d 446
    , 449
    (2006) ("Generally, failure to raise an argument in the district court
    proceedings precludes a party from presenting the argument on appeal.").
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 58603

Filed Date: 3/14/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014