Havas v. Engebregson
This text of 580 P.2d 122 (Havas v. Engebregson) 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
[337]*337OPINION
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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
580 P.2d 122, 94 Nev. 336, 1978 Nev. LEXIS 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/havas-v-engebregson-nev-1978.