Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sierra Pacific Power Company v. Nye

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1964No. 4654, 4655Published

1Dissent

*97Wines, D. J.,

dissenting:

The Second Claim for Relief is stated in terms of unjust enrichment, the Third Claim is for overcharges. The facts alleged in the First Claim for Relief and the facts settled by the Stipulation of Facts between these parties, have been recited in the majority opinion, except specific mention is not therein made of these facts — there were no negotiations between these parties when the changeover was made; the Nyes were not informed by an agent of the Power Company concerning rate schedules, nor of the rate schedules assigned in charging the Nyes’ predecessor, nor of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. El Paso Electric Co. v. Raynolds Holding Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1937
  2. El Paso Electric Co. v. Raynolds Holding Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Pantebakos v. Rockingham County Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API