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