Summary
noting that issues supported by no relevant authority will not be considered
Summary of this case from State v. BakstOpinion
No. 7857
August 31, 1976
Appeal from the Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; John E. Gabrielli, J.
Breen, Young, Whitehead Hoy, Reno, for Appellant.
Julian Smith, Esq., Carson City, for Respondents.
Stewart Horton, Ltd., Reno, for Intervenor First National Bank of Nevada.
OPINION
Here, both sides raise numerous issues on appeal and cross-appeal. After reviewing the record, we conclude the issues presented are either raised for the first time on appeal, supported by no relevant authority, or concern determinations which are based on substantial evidence. For these reasons, and because neither side has affirmatively demonstrated error, the judgment is affirmed. Peot v. Peot, 92 Nev. 388, 551 P.2d 242 (1976). Charmicor, Inc. v. Bradshaw Finance Co., 92 Nev. 310, 550 P.2d 413 (1976); Alves v. Bumguardner, 91 Nev. 799, 544 P.2d 436 (1975); County of Clark v. Lucas, 91 Nev. 263, 534 P.2d 499 (1975); Kulik v. Albers Incorporated, 91 Nev. 134, 532 P.2d 603 (1975); Solar, Inc. v. Electric Smith Constr., 88 Nev. 457, 499 P.2d 649 (1972).
Affirmed.