Legal Opinion
Pro-Max Corp. v. Feenstra
Nevada Supreme Court
Decided January 31, 2001No. 30774; No. 30859PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON REHEARING
2Per curiam
On September 15, 2000, this court issued an opinion in this appeal. Respondents Jack A. Ferguson, Peter Feenstra and Shirley Feenstra timely petitioned for rehearing. In light of the rehearing petition, we withdrew our September 15, 2000, opinion. We now conclude that rehearing is warranted and therefore grant the petition and issue this opinion in place of our previously withdrawn opinion.
The primary issue presented in this appeal requires us to consider the scope of NRS 106.240, which extinguishes certain real property debts ten years after they become due absent…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- Charlie Brown Construction Co. v. City of Boulder CityNevada Supreme Court · 1990
- Cheqer, Inc. v. Painters & Decorators Joint Committee, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1982
- State ex rel. Brockliss v. JepsenNevada Supreme Court · 1922
- Nga 2 Limited Liability Co. v. RainsNevada Supreme Court · 1997
- Erwin v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by45 opinions
- Bank of N.Y. v. S. Highlands Cmty. Ass'nDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2018
- Housman v. LBM Financial, LLCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- Bank of N.Y. v. Foothills at MacDonald Ranch Master Ass'nDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2018
- Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. RuddellDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2019
- Harvard 45 Associates, LLC v. Allied Properties & Mortgages, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.