Hu v. Harsch Inv. Prop.-Nevada, LLC
This text of Hu v. Harsch Inv. Prop.-Nevada, LLC (Hu v. Harsch Inv. Prop.-Nevada, LLC) 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
JOHN D. HU, ESQ., No. 67906 Appellant, vs. HARSCH INVESTMENT PROPERTIES- FILED NEVADA, LLC, AN OREGON LIMITED MAR 1 8 2016 LIABILITY COMPANY, QUALIFIED TO DO BUSINESS IN NEVADA, Respondent.
ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION IN PART, VACATING JUDGMENT AND REMANDING This is a pro se appeal from a district court judgment on an arbitration award in a contract action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Nancy L. Allf, Judge. We directed respondent to file a response to appellant's pro se brief and specifically address whether the district court's order striking appellant's request for a trial de novo under NAR 22(A) complied with Chamberland u. Labarbera, 110 Nev. 701, 705, 877 P.2d 523, 525 (1994), requiring such orders to be accompanied by specific written findings of fact and conclusions of law by the district court describing the type of conduct and how it constituted a failure of good faith participation. In response, the parties filed a joint "stipulation to dismiss appeal and underlying actions" requesting the dismissal with prejudice of this appeal, the underlying arbitration award and judgment for respondent, and appellant's underlying counterclaim. The stipulation also requests that each party bear their own attorney fees and costs and that respondent refund to appellant his security deposit of $4,366 but no other funds.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 19()7A (zt#) -01((c-77 Because a dismissal of this appeal would allow the judgment on the arbitration award to stand, which is not the intent of the parties' stipulation, we disapprove of the stipulation to the extent it seeks this appeal's dismissal and approve it to the extent it seeks to undo the underlying judgment. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment entered on the arbitration award and remand this matter to the district court with instructions to enter an order dismissing the case under the terms of the parties' stipulation. The parties shall bear their own attorney fees and costs on appeal. NRAP 42(b). It is so ORDERED.
T-Lt Hardesty
Saitta
Poeudn, J. Pickering
cc: Hon. Nancy L. Allf, District Judge John D. Hu Albright Stoddard Warnick & Albright Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (U) P)47A cEattp
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hu v. Harsch Inv. Prop.-Nevada, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hu-v-harsch-inv-prop-nevada-llc-nev-2016.