Legal Opinion

Musso v. Binick

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 1988No. 18335PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*614OPINION

2Per curiam

This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting respondents’ motion for summary judgment and awarding attorney’s fees to respondents. On June 23, 1988, this court issued an order dismissing this appeal. Respondents, having prevailed on appeal, have moved for an award of attorney’s fees on appeal. The motion is opposed.

The district court awarded respondents attorney’s fees pursuant to a sales agreement which provides: “[I]n the event any parties shall prevail in any legal action commenced to enforce the agreement, they shall be entitled to all costs incurred in such…

3Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Management Services Corp. v. Development AssociatesUtah Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Zambruk v. Perlmutter 3rd Generation Builders, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1973
  4. Puget Sound Mutual Savings Bank v. LillionsWashington Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Cowgill v. DoddNevada Supreme Court · 1971

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. Davis v. BelingNevada Supreme Court · 2012
  2. LePome v. BerksonNevada Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Axos Bank v. 64-03 Realty LLC, Wing Fung Chau, and Wendy ChauDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2026
  4. Mehta v. Victoria PartnersDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API