Washoe Medical Center, Inc. v. Lyon County

813 P.2d 1008, 107 Nev. 493, 1991 Nev. LEXIS 126
CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 3, 1991
DocketNo. 21669
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 813 P.2d 1008 (Washoe Medical Center, Inc. v. Lyon County) 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
Washoe Medical Center, Inc. v. Lyon County, 813 P.2d 1008, 107 Nev. 493, 1991 Nev. LEXIS 126 (Neb. 1991).

Opinion

[494]*494OPINION

Per Curiam:

Appellant Washoe Medical Center (WMC) provided medical care to a resident of respondent Lyon County. Believing the resident was an indigent, WMC notified the Lyon County Clerk of its medical services and requested payment for those services pursuant to statute. After the County refused to provide reimbursement, appellant filed its initial complaint in Washoe County on July 14, 1987, praying for $13,254.87, interest, and attorney’s fees. Respondent moved for summary judgment after successfully contesting the venue.1 The district court granted summary judgment to respondent, concluding that the notice provided was not to the board of county commissioners and was therefore statutorily defective. On appeal, appellant contends that summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact remain. We agree.

The determinative issue on appeal is whether the Lyon County Board of Commissioners had actual notice of the medical services provided by WMC. Although NRS 450.4002 states that notice shall be “in writing . . . addressed to the board of county commissioners,” we conclude that actual notice would satisfy the requirements of NRS 450.400. The purpose of the notice requirement is to enable the commissioners of the resident county to remove a patient to the local hospital so that the hospitalized person is closer to her family and friends, and so that local facilities are utilized. See Att’y Gen. Op. No. 36, at 87 (1971). Actual notice fulfills all of the purposes of the notice requirement. See also Washoe Co. v. Eureka Co., 25 Nev. 356, 60 P. 376 (1900).

[495]*495No discovery was conducted in this case prior to summary judgment. Accordingly, the possibility remains that the board of county commissioners had actual notice of the medical services provided by WMC. Because of this possibility, a genuine issue of material fact persists and we cannot affirm the award of summary judgment to Lyon County. Butler v. Bogdanovich, 101 Nev. 449, 451, 705 P.2d 662, 663 (1985) (summary judgment is only appropriate when, after a review of the record, in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, there remain no issues of material fact).3 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s award of summary judgment and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Mowbray, C. J., Rose, Steffen and Young, JJ., and Breen, D. J.,4 concur.

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

Related

Washoe Medical Center, Inc. v. Churchill County
836 P.2d 624 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1992)
Nye County v. Washoe Medical Center
835 P.2d 780 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
813 P.2d 1008, 107 Nev. 493, 1991 Nev. LEXIS 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/washoe-medical-center-inc-v-lyon-county-nev-1991.