Beverly Enterprises v. Globe Land Corporation

526 P.2d 1179, 90 Nev. 363, 1974 Nev. LEXIS 396
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 10, 1974
Docket7350
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 526 P.2d 1179 (Beverly Enterprises v. Globe Land Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beverly Enterprises v. Globe Land Corporation, 526 P.2d 1179, 90 Nev. 363, 1974 Nev. LEXIS 396 (Neb. 1974).

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Globe Laud Corporation, acting primarily through its president, Fischer, negotiated an agreement whereby Beverly Enterprises agreed to buy, upon completion, a 200-bed convalescent hospital in Las Vegas. The contract required, in part, that construction plans and specifications were subject to Beverly’s approval which, by the contract’s terms, was not to be unreasonably withheld. After attempting unsuccessfully to secure Beverly’s approval of plans and specifications, Globe commenced this action, alleging breach by Beverly of its duty of performance. The district court, following a trial and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law, awarded Globe judgment against Beverly for $66,054, plus interest, costs of suit, and $3,500 attorneys’ fees. This appeal follows.

As error, Beverly urges that the trial court should have resolved certain factual issues against Globe rather than in its *365 favor; however, after review of the record, we are satisfied the trial court’s factual determinations are not contrary to the record. “It is the prerogative of the trier of facts to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and determine the weight of their testimony, and it is not within the province of the appellate court to instruct the trier of fact that certain witnesses or testimony must be believed.” Douglas Spencer v. Las Vegas Sun, 84 Nev. 279, 282, 439 P.2d 473, 475 (1968). Where a question of fact has been determined by the trial court, this court will not reverse unless the judgment is clearly erroneous and not based on substantial evidence. NRCP 52(a); Kockos v. Bank of Nevada, 90 Nev. 140, 520 P.2d 1359 (1974); Fletcher v. Fletcher, 89 Nev. 540, 516 P.2d 103 (1973).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Spittler v. Routsis
Nevada Supreme Court, 2013
Bahena v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
235 P.3d 592 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2010)
Nevada Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Sierra Auto Center
844 P.2d 126 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1992)
Young v. Nevada Title Co.
744 P.2d 902 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1987)
El Dorado Hotel, Inc. v. Brown
691 P.2d 436 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1984)
Landex, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. List
582 P.2d 786 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1978)
Western Industries, Inc. v. General Insurance Co.
533 P.2d 473 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
526 P.2d 1179, 90 Nev. 363, 1974 Nev. LEXIS 396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beverly-enterprises-v-globe-land-corporation-nev-1974.