Legal Opinion
Nevada Real Estate Commission v. Ressel
Nevada Supreme Court
Decided March 20, 1956No. 3908PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By the Court, Badt, J.:
The sole question presented by this appeal is: Is proof of irreparable damage essential to the granting of an injunction against continued violation of the provisions of the Nevada Real Estate Brokers Act? Secs. 6396.01-6396.35, N.C.L.19'43-1949 Supp. We answer in the negative.
The act in question defines real estate brokers and requires that all persons operating as such obtain a license from the Nevada State Real Estate Commission. Appellant’s complaint brought respondents squarely within the provisions of the act, alleg-ed respondents’ threatened continued…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- City of Rochester v. . GutberlettNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Smith v. City CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1937
- Board of Medical Examiners of Utah v. BlairUtah Supreme Court · 1921
- Campbell v. PeacockCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Ex Parte AllisonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1905
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ackerman v. Tri-City Geriatric & Health Care, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
- State of Nevada Employees Ass'n v. DainesNevada Supreme Court · 1992
- The People Ex Rel. Carpentier v. GoersIllinois Supreme Court · 1960
- Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners v. HyderArizona Supreme Court · 1977
- State Ex Rel. Office of the Attorney General v. NOS Communications, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2004
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.