Walport v. Walport

646 P.2d 1215, 98 Nev. 301, 1982 Nev. LEXIS 456
Nevada Supreme Court·Decided June 25, 1982·No. 13639·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

*302 OPINION

Per Curiam:

On January 20, 1982, respondent was granted 30 days in which to obtain counsel, and 60 days in which to file her brief in this matter. Respondent failed to comply with that order. On April 5, 1982, we entered an order, sua sponte, granting respondent an additional 30 days to obtain counsel and to file her brief in this matter. Respondent was, at that time, informed that failure to comply with our order might be treated by the court as a confession of error and appropriate disposition of the appeal made. Nevertheless, respondent has not filed an answering brief and, apparently, has not retained counsel.

We choose to treat respondent’s conduct as a confession of error. NRAP 31(c); Rockwell v. Rockwell, 98 Nev. 80, 640 P.2d 1318 (1982). Accordingly, we reverse the order denying appellant’s motion to modify the decree of divorce in this matter, and we remand to the district court for further proceedings.

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

Walport v. Walport, 646 P.2d 1215, 98 Nev. 301, 1982 Nev. LEXIS 456 (Neb. 1982).

646 P.2d 1215 (Walport v. Walport) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Polk v. State
233 P.3d 357 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2010)
Dittmann v. Dittmann
676 P.2d 811 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1984)
Burton v. Burton
669 P.2d 703 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1983)
Smith v. Smith
649 P.2d 1374 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1982)