City of Las Vegas v. Bailey

558 P.2d 622, 92 Nev. 756, 1976 Nev. LEXIS 748
Nevada Supreme Court·Decided December 30, 1976·No. No. 8643·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Respondents sought and obtained, in the district court, an extraordinary writ of mandamus against the City of Las Vegas. The City ignored the writ; and, in ancillary proceedings to compel compliance, the district court found, as fact, “bad faith conduct” on the part of the City because of its willful and deliberate failure to obey the lawful and unchallenged writ.

Special damages, in the form of an attorney’s fee, were awarded respondents for the legal work which the “bad faith conduct” necessitated. The City has appealed.

We are not persuaded by the record, nor the briefs submitted by the City, that in this factual setting, the award of damages constituted reversible error. See American Fed. Musicians v. Reno’s Riverside, 86 Nev. 695, 475 P.2d 221 (1970). Accordingly, we affirm. See also: Holland Livestock v. B & C Enterprises, 92 Nev. 473, 553 P.2d 950 (1976); City of Las Vegas v. Cragin Industries, 86 Nev. 933, 478 P.2d 585 (1970); Swallow Ranches, Inc. v. Bidart, 525 F.2d 995 (9th Cir. 1975).

Although respondents filed a cross-appeal, which contended they were entitled to additional fees, they have advanced neither relevant nor authoritative argument on their behalf; therefore, the cross-appeal is dismissed.

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

City of Las Vegas v. Bailey, 558 P.2d 622, 92 Nev. 756, 1976 Nev. LEXIS 748 (Neb. 1976).

558 P.2d 622 (City of Las Vegas v. Bailey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Edwards v. Emperor's Garden Restaurant
130 P.3d 1280 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2006)
Anderson v. Weise
598 P.2d 1144 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1979)