Walters v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the obligee's motion for summary judgment qualified as a timely \application\ for a deficiency, but not addressing whether the obligee's counterclaim and cross-claim also qualified, and noting that NRS 40.455(1
• holding that the obligee's motion for summary judgment qualified as a timely \application\ for a deficiency, but not addressing whether the obligee's counterclaim and cross-claim also qualified, and noting that NRS 40.455(1
• stating that NRS 40.455(1) requires an application within six months after a foreclosure sale
• stating that NRS 40.455(1) requires an application within six months after a foreclosure sale
• engaging in an analysis that indicates that although guarantors are protected by Nevada's anti-deficiency statutes, a deficiency judgment against a guarantor is premised on the breach of the underlying guaranty agreement
• engaging in an analysis that indicates that although guarantors are protected by Nevada's anti-deficiency statutes, a deficiency judgment against a guarantor is premised on the breach of the underlying guaranty agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).