Bd. of Gallery of History v. Datecs Corp., 27865.
| Decision Date | 09 March 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. 27865.,27865. |
| Parties | BOARD OF GALLERY OF HISTORY, INC., Also Known as American Museum of Historical Documents, Chartered, a Nevada Corporation, Appellant, v. DATECS CORPORATION, a Nevada Corporation d/b/a Forward Edge Technologies, and Software Services, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Datecs Corporation, Respondents. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
994 P.2d 1149
116 Nev. 286
v.
DATECS CORPORATION, a Nevada Corporation d/b/a Forward Edge Technologies, and Software Services, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Datecs Corporation, Respondents
No. 27865.
Supreme Court of Nevada.
March 9, 2000.
Croteau & Shawhan, Las Vegas, for Appellant.
Christensen & Boggess, Las Vegas, for Respondents.
BEFORE MAUPIN, SHEARING and BECKER, JJ.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
The issue before this court is the authority of the district court to award attorney fees and costs, after the appeal from the final judgment in the action was dismissed by this court. We conclude that the district court had no such authority in this case.
In a contract dispute between Datecs Corporation ("Datecs") and Board of Gallery of History, Inc. ("Gallery"), the district court found in favor of Datecs and awarded it a judgment in the amount of $31,872.84 plus $5,000.00 in attorney fees and $1,365.70 in costs. The district court awarded the attorney
After making several unsuccessful post-trial motions, Gallery appealed the judgment and the district court's denial of its post-trial motions. This court affirmed the district court's judgment, including the award of attorney fees and costs. This court also concluded that Gallery's conduct on appeal did not merit imposition of sanctions and expressly rejected Datecs's request for attorney fees pursuant to NRAP 38(b).
After the dismissal of Gallery's appeal, Datecs moved the district court for supplemental attorney fees and costs incurred "in enforcing and protecting the Judgment from the Post-Trial Motions and Defendant's Appeal." The district court found that Gallery's post-trial motions and the appeal were actions undertaken "without reasonable ground or to harass" and awarded Datecs an additional $7,500.00 in attorney fees pursuant to NRS 18.010(2)(b) and $697.53 in costs pursuant to NRAP 39(a). Gallery appeals from the district court's order.
DISCUSSION
Gallery contends that the district court lacked authority to award the additional attorney fees and costs. We agree.
Attorney fees are not recoverable absent a statute, rule, or contractual provision to the contrary. See Rowland v. Lepire, 99 Nev. 308, 315, 662 P.2d 1332, 1336 (1983). There is no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Edwards v. Emperor's Garden Restaurant
...622 (1976); Ellison v. State, 87 Nev. 4, 4 n. 1, 479 P.2d 461, 461 n. 1 (1971); NRAP 28(a)(4). 39. Bd. of Gallery of History v. Datecs Corp., 116 Nev. 286, 288, 994 P.2d 1149, 1150 (2000) (recognizing that the district court may award attorney fees when authorized by a statute, rule, or con......
-
Russo v. Shac, LLC
...it impliedly ruled on the motion by dismissing Russo's complaint with prejudice. See Bd. of Gallery of History, Inc. v. Datecs Corp., 116 Nev. 286, 289, 994 P.2d 1149, 1150 (2000) (explaining that the absence of a ruling by the district court on a motion constitutes a denial of the motion).......
-
Wheeler Springs Plaza, LLC v. Beemon
...237 P.2d at 7; Frankfather, 225 P.2d at 1040; Webb, 80 P.2d at 707-08; Winthrop, 269 P. at 796. 11. Bd. of Gallery of History v. Datecs Corp., 116 Nev. 286, 289, 994 P.2d 1149, 1150 (2000). 12. Quern v. Jordan, 440 U.S. 332, 347 n. 18, 99 S.Ct. 1139, 59 L.Ed.2d 358 13. Section 3.5 of the le......
-
Russo v. Shac, LLC
...complaint, it impliedly ruled on the motion by dismissing Russo's complaint with prejudice. See Bd. of Gallery of History, Inc. v. Datecs Corp ., 116 Nev. 286, 289, 994 P.2d 1149, 1150 (2000) (explaining that the absence of a ruling by the district court on a motion constitutes a denial of ......