Havas v. Engebregson

580 P.2d 122, 94 Nev. 336, 1978 Nev. LEXIS 557
Nevada Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1978·No. No. 9007·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

[337] OPINION

Per Curiam:

Respondent commenced this action seeking attorney’s fees for legal services rendered on behalf of Joseph Van Eykeren, appellant’s co-defendant below. Havas was joined in the action because he had allegedly promised Van Eykeren to pay his fees.

Following a trial before the district court, judgment was entered in favor of respondent against Havas alone, the court specifically finding that Van Eykeren had given Havas the money to pay respondent, but Havas had failed to do so.

Appellant contends the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain the judgment. We disagree.

“Where a trial court, sitting without a jury, makes a determination upon conflicting evidence, that determination will not be disturbed on appeal where, as here, it is supported by substantial evidence.” J & J Building Contractors, Inc. v. Savage Construction, Inc., 92 Nev. 590, 555 P.2d 488, 489 (1976).

Affirmed.1'2

Footnotes

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

Havas v. Engebregson, 580 P.2d 122, 94 Nev. 336, 1978 Nev. LEXIS 557 (Neb. 1978).

580 P.2d 122 (Havas v. Engebregson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sierra Creek Ranch, Inc. v. J. I. Case
634 P.2d 458 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1981)
General Electric Supply Co. v. Mt. Wheeler Power, Inc.
587 P.2d 1312 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1978)
Clifmar, Inc. v. Lee
584 P.2d 157 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1978)