Legal Opinion

Winchell v. Schiff

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 2008No. 47067PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Douglas, J.:

In this appeal and cross-appeal, we primarily consider whether actual losses resulting from the conversion of inventory include the value of a lost business. We conclude that full recovery for actual losses includes not only the converted inventory, but also resulting damages such as the value of a lost business.

FACTS

Appellant/cross-respondent Calvin Winchell, d/b/a CGL Seafood, Inc., owned and operated a wholesale fresh fish business in Las Vegas, Nevada. Winchell’s business grew from $36,780 in sales in 1996 to $759,711 in 2000. With such dramatic growth, *942Winc…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Edwards v. Emperor's Garden RestaurantNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Nelson v. HeerNevada Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Lioce v. CohenNevada Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Hrnjak v. Graymar, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Evans v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Wyeth v. RowattNevada Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Road & Highway Builders, LLC v. Northern Nevada Rebar, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Reyburn Lawn & Landscape Designers, Inc. v. Plaster Development Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Las Vegas Development Group, LLC v. YfantisDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2016
  5. Caraveo v. PerezNevada Supreme Court · 2013

31 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