Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bahena v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided December 30, 2010No. 49207Published

1DissentPickering, J.

I would grant rehearing because I believe due process requires it. The $30,000,000 default judgment in this case rests on the district court choosing to believe one side’s lawyers over another’s, with no evidentiary hearing, no cross-examination, and a genuine dispute over willfulness, fault, and prejudice. The majority quotes *616dictum from Robinson v. Higuera, 760 P.2d 622, 624 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988), questioned in Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Superior Court, 863 P.2d 911 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993), that “[d]ue process does not require that a hearing be held in every case” (emphasis added) involving…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Young v. Johnny Ribeiro Building, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Pinkstaff v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2009
  3. Nevada Power Co. v. Flour IllinoisNevada Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1993
  5. Robinson v. HigueraCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1988

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API