Flintkote Co. v. Interstate Equipment Corp.

571 P.2d 815, 93 Nev. 597, 1977 Nev. LEXIS 641
Nevada Supreme Court·Decided December 1, 1977·No. No. 8940·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

[598]*598OPINION

Per Curiam:

This is an appeal from an order of the district court dismissing appellants-plaintiffs’ complaint for not bringing the action to trial within five years. Appellants predicate their appeal on the novel theory that the parties entered into a stipulation, which was approved by the district judge, striking a paragraph from plaintiffs’ complaint, and that such stipulation carried with it a necessary implication that the parties were agreeing to extend the five-year period set forth in NRCP 41 (e).1

We find, as did the lower court, no such implication in the stipulation. Indeed, the language of the rule provides that a stipulation to continue the five-year period shall be in writing. Appellants cite no authority except Spiegelman v. Gold Dust Texaco, 91 Nev. 542, 539 P.2d 1216 (1975), which is not supportive of their position, since Spiegelman dealt with a discretionary dismissal for lack of prosecution, rather than a mandatory dismissal after the expiration of five years, as in the instant case.

We affirm, with costs to respondent.

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

Flintkote Co. v. Interstate Equipment Corp., 571 P.2d 815, 93 Nev. 597, 1977 Nev. LEXIS 641 (Neb. 1977).

571 P.2d 815 (Flintkote Co. v. Interstate Equipment Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tripi Vs. Johnson C/W 80747
Nevada Supreme Court, 2021
Carstarphen v. Milsner
270 P.3d 1251 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2012)