Buchanan v. Goldman

555 P.2d 842, 92 Nev. 607, 1976 Nev. LEXIS 683
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 4, 1976
DocketNo. 9006
StatusPublished

This text of 555 P.2d 842 (Buchanan v. Goldman) 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
Buchanan v. Goldman, 555 P.2d 842, 92 Nev. 607, 1976 Nev. LEXIS 683 (Neb. 1976).

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Under the Rules of Appellate Procedure, respondent was required to serve and file his answering brief on or before November 2, 1976. The brief was neither filed within the allotted time nor has any explanation been tendered for [608]*608respondent’s failure to comply with the requirements of the rules.

Accordingly, under the authority of, and for the same reasons stated in, Kitchen Factors, Inc. v. Brown, 91 Nev. 308, 535 P.2d 677 (1975), we elect to treat the omission as a confession of error.

The order of the district court is reversed and we remand this proceeding with instructions to vacate the order holding appellant in contempt.

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

Related

Kitchen Factors, Inc. v. Brown
535 P.2d 677 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
555 P.2d 842, 92 Nev. 607, 1976 Nev. LEXIS 683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buchanan-v-goldman-nev-1976.