Schmidt v. Kieckhefer ( 2015 )

 was made in good faith, it further found that Kieckhefer could nonetheless
win his defamation lawsuit by showing that Schmidt made the statement
with malice.
On appeal, Schmidt argues that Kieckhefer failed to show by
clear and convincing evidence a probability of success in his defamation
suit. He argues that the Las Vegas Sun article may be read to imply that
the "longtime leader" that Kieckhefer supported was Harry Reid.
Prior to 2013, this court treated special motions to dismiss as
motions for summary judgment and therefore reviewed the resulting
orders de novo. 2 See John v. Douglas Cnty. Sch, Dist., 125 Nev. 746, 753,
219 P.3d 1276, 1281 (2009). After 2013, however, with the plaintiffs
burden increased to clear and convincing evidence, this court will provide
greater deference to the lower court's findings of fact and therefore will
review for an abuse of discretion.
"This court will affirm a district court's order if the district
court reached the correct result, even if for the wrong reason." Saavedra-
Sandoval v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 126 Nev. 592, 599, 245 P.3d 1198, 1202
(2010).
We conclude that the district court correctly denied Schmidt's
motion to dismiss, but abused its discretion when it erroneously found
that Schmidt made his statements in good faith. There is no rational way
to read the Las Vegas Sun article without concluding that Kieckhefer
2NRS 41.660(3)(a), as enacted in 1997, provided specific instruction
to "R]reat the motion as a motion for summary judgment." In 2013, the
legislature amended NRS 41.660(3)(b) to require the plaintiff establish by
clear and convincing evidence his or her probability of prevailing on the
merits.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1.947A 44e4
supported Raggio for majority leader. Because one cannot rationally infer
from this article that Kieckhefer supported Reid and there has been
absolutely no other evidence presented that supports Schmidt's statement,
we conclude that he did not act in good faith when he claimed that
Kieckhefer supported Reid. 3 Accordingly, we
ORDER the decision of the district court AFFIRMED.
fi c4A , C.J.
Hardesty
jAi 51 ns2_
Parraguirre
A J.
Pickering
CC: Hon. Jerome M. Polaha, District Judge
Charles R. Kozak
McDonald Carano Wilson LLP/Las Vegas
McDonald Carano Wilson LLP/Reno
Washoe District Court Clerk
3 It
is therefore unnecessary to reach a conclusion on the second
prong of the special motion to dismiss, namely whether Kieckhefer has
shown clear and convincing evidence that he has a probability of success
on the merits of his defamation suit.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e