Daines v. Abrams
This text of 659 P.2d 296 (Daines v. Abrams) 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.
Opinion
OPINION
This is an appeal from a judgment awarding respondent Abrams excess compensation in connection with his appointment to represent a certain indigent in a criminal matter. Appellant Daines filed a timely opening brief, but Abrams has not filed an answering brief. On January 24, 1983, we ordered Abrams to show cause why his failure to file a brief should not be treated as a confession of error pursuant to NRAP 31(c). Abrams has filed no brief, nor has he responded to our order to show cause.
Cause appearing, we elect to treat Abrams’ conduct as a confession of error. NRAP 31(c); see Smith v. Smith, 98 Nev. 395, 649 P.2d 1374 (1982). Accordingly, the judgment below in Abrams’ favor is reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
659 P.2d 296, 99 Nev. 98, 1983 Nev. LEXIS 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daines-v-abrams-nev-1983.