Casino Car Wash, Inc. v. Koepenick
555 P.2d 1327, 92 Nev. 647
Opinion
OPINION
Appellants’ only claim of error is that certain findings of fact by the district court are unsupported by the evidence. After reviewing the record, we conclude the findings are supported by substantial evidence, and, thus, we will not disturb them 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).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Casino Car Wash, Inc. v. Koepenick, 555 P.2d 1327, 92 Nev. 647 (Neb. 1976).
555 P.2d 1327 (Casino Car Wash, Inc. v. Koepenick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
County of Clark v. Lucas
534 P.2d 499 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1975)
Alves v. Bumguardner
544 P.2d 436 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1975)