Applewhite Mortgage & Investment Co. v. Vaccaro
Opinion
OPINION
Respondents sought and recovered damages which resulted from appellant’s breach of a commitment to loan money to finance the construction of respondents’ home. Appellant contends this was error. We disagree.
The district court’s finding of detrimental reliance is supported by substantial evidence, and, thus, we will not disturb it on appeal. Alves v. Bumguardner, 91 Nev. 799, 544 P.2d 436 (1975); County of Clark v. Lucas, 91 Nev. 263, 534 P.2d 499 (1975).
Other contentions by appellant are without merit, and we need not consider them.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
556 P.2d 542 (Applewhite Mortgage & Investment Co. v. Vaccaro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.