Davenport v. Comstock Hills-Reno
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*390OPINION
By the Court,
Rose, L:
As the primary issue of this appeal, we consider the breadth of Nevada’s statutes of repose, which absolutely bar any action stemming from injuries caused by a negligently designed or constructed improvement to real property after a certain period of time has passed. In this case, appellant sued the respondents for injuries that she suffered after falling from a retaining wall on their property. The district court granted summary judgment to the respondents, concluding, among other things, that a statute of repose barred the suit. We conclude that the district…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Skinner v. AndersonIllinois Supreme Court · 1967
- Moody v. Manny's Auto RepairNevada Supreme Court · 1994
- Gunlock v. New Frontier Hotel Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1962
- State v. WebsterNevada Supreme Court · 1972
- Cleghorn v. HessNevada Supreme Court · 1993
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. MadplumeMontana Supreme Court · 2017
- Shea v. HOUSEHOLD BANK (SB)California Court of Appeal · 2003
- Davenport v. Comstock Hills-RenoNevada Supreme Court · 2002
- Libby v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct.Nevada Supreme Court · 2014
- Mineral County v. State, Board of EqualizationNevada Supreme Court · 2005
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.