Dobron v. Bunch
Nevada Supreme Court
1Concurrence
Pickering, J.,
with whom Cherry, J., agrees, concurring:
I join the majority based on the particular attorney fees clause involved. The guaranty provided for the Bunches, as “Lender,” to recover fees the “Lender expends or incurs in collecting or compromising [the] indebtedness . . ."1 Fees spent to defend the borrower’s usury suit, which apparently did not involve any affirmative claims by the Bunches against the borrower, were not incurred by the Bunches “in collecting or compromising [the] indebtedness.” Unlike California, Cal. Civ. Code § 1717, Nevada permits one-sided attorney fees…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Exchange National Bank of Chicago v. Harold Daniels and Irene DanielsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Towers Charter & Marine Corporation, Counter-Defendant v. Cadillac Insurance Company, Counter-Plaintiff v. Steven Hoffenberg, Additional on the Counterclaim-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- First National Park Bank v. Snellen M. Johnson and Ven SavageCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1977
- First Commercial Title, Inc. v. HolmesNevada Supreme Court · 1976
- Trustees of the Carpenters for Southern Nevada Health & Welfare Trust v. Better Building Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1985
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.