Legal Opinion

Crescent v. White

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided December 6, 1976No. 8371Published

1Opinion of the Court

*662OPINION

2Per curiam

Appellant, plaintiff below, commenced this action under the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, NRS 112.010 et seq., to set aside a conveyance of real property Gill White made to his wife, Dorothy White.1

At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case, the district court granted Dorothy White’s motion to dismiss, pursuant to NRCP 41(b), because appellant failed to prove, as required-by NRS 112.050, that Gill White was insolvent when the conveyance was made, or that the conveyance had rendered him insolvent.

Appellant subsequently obtained the determination required by NRCP 54(b) and perfected…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mohar v. McLelland Lumber CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Miller v. KeeganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  3. Alves v. BumguardnerNevada Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Crescent v. WhiteNevada Supreme Court · 1975

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API