Pearson v. Clucas

Nevada Supreme Court

Pearson v. Clucas

510 P.2d 629, 89 Nev. 179, 1973 Nev. LEXIS 467

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedMay 30, 1973

DocketNo. 6962

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 510 P.2d 629 (Pearson v. Clucas) 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.

Bluebook

Pearson v. Clucas, 510 P.2d 629, 89 Nev. 179, 1973 Nev. LEXIS 467 (Neb. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Pearson, as subrogor, and Allstate Insurance, as subrogee, commenced a spurious action against Frank Clucas to recover compensation for damage to an automobile. Clucas was forced to defend or suffer default. He engaged attorneys to represent him who filed an answer pointing out that he was not liable as a matter of law, and counterclaimed for damages in the form of attorneys’ fees necessarily incurred. American Fed. Musicians v. Reno’s Riverside, 86 Nev. 695, 699, 475 P.2d 220 (1970).

Realizing that Clucas was not liable, the plaintiffs then offered to dismiss their complaint with prejudice and to pay the costs incurred by Clucas. That offer was not accepted. Subsequently, summary judgment was entered for Clucas and attorneys’ fees in the form of damages awarded. Contrary to plaintiffs-appellants’ contention, the “offer of judgment” rule, NRCP 68, does not preclude that award.

Affirmed.

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