Summa Corp. v. Brooks Rent-A-Car

Nevada Supreme Court

Summa Corp. v. Brooks Rent-A-Car

602 P.2d 192, 95 Nev. 779, 1979 Nev. LEXIS 657

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 13, 1979

DocketNo. 10649

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 602 P.2d 192 (Summa Corp. v. Brooks Rent-A-Car) 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

Summa Corp. v. Brooks Rent-A-Car, 602 P.2d 192, 95 Nev. 779, 1979 Nev. LEXIS 657 (Neb. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Appellant’s opening brief was filed on September 5, 1978. Respondent sought and was granted an extension of time to November 10, 1978 in which to file its answering brief. Respondent, however, neither filed its brief when it was due, nor has it requested a further extension of time in which to do so.

Because of respondent’s dereliction, appellant has filed a motion for confession of error and summary reversal. See NRAP 31(c). In its response to the motion, respondent suggests that, in lieu of an answering brief, this court may search “the entire transcript of the proceedings below” to answer the arguments raised by appellant.

This court will not comb the record to ascertain matters which should have been set forth in respondent’s brief. See State v. Cecchettini, 45 Nev. 238, 201 P. 547 (1921). Instead, we elect to treat respondent’s failure to file its answering brief as a confession of error. Kitchen Factors, Inc. v. Brown, 91 Nev. 308, 535 P.2d 677 (1975). Accordingly, the judgment in respondent’s favor is reversed and this case is remanded for trial on the merits.

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