From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moline v. Ah-Mau

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Apr 7, 2011
373 P.3d 943 (Nev. 2011)

Opinion

No. 51427.

04-07-2011

Joshua MOLINE, Appellant, v. Deneen AH–MAU, Respondent.

Michael J. Warhola, LLC Alan J. Buttell & Associates


Michael J. Warhola, LLC

Alan J. Buttell & Associates

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a district court order awarding respondent attorney fees and costs. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; Gloria S. Sanchez, Judge.

Having considered the parties' appellate arguments and the appellate record, we affirm the district court's order awarding attorney fees and costs because appellant is precluded from challenging the district court's decision. EDCR 2.20(c) (“Failure of the opposing party to serve and file written opposition may be construed as an admission that the motion ... is meritorious and a consent to granting the same.”); Walls v. Brewster. 112 Nev. 175, 178, 912 P.2d 261, 263 (1996) (stating that the district court properly construed the failure to oppose a motion as admitting that the motion had merit and consenting to granting the motion); cf. Diamond Enters., Inc. v. Lau, 113 Nev. 1376, 1378, 951 P.2d 73, 74 (1997) (stating that an argument made for the first time on appeal is waived). Appellant was served with a copy of respondent's memorandum of fees, costs, and disbursements, but failed to oppose respondent's request. Thus, appellant has waived his right to appeal that issue. Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Moline v. Ah-Mau

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Apr 7, 2011
373 P.3d 943 (Nev. 2011)
Case details for

Moline v. Ah-Mau

Case Details

Full title:Joshua MOLINE, Appellant, v. Deneen AH–MAU, Respondent.

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada.

Date published: Apr 7, 2011

Citations

373 P.3d 943 (Nev. 2011)