NRS
31.190 Undertaking of defendant; determination of disputed value of
property; justification by sureties.
1. On granting an order for discharge of
attachment pursuant to NRS 31.180, the
court or the judge shall require an undertaking on behalf of the defendant,
with at least two sureties, residents and freeholders, or householders, in the
county, which shall be filed:
(a) To the effect, in case the value of the
property or the amount of money, debts, or credits sought to be released equals
or exceeds the demand of the writ, that the defendant will pay to the plaintiff
the amount of the judgment which may be recovered in favor of the plaintiff in
the action or the demand of the writ, whichever is less; or
(b) To the effect, in case the value of the
property or the amount of money, debts, or credits sought to be released is
less than the demand of the writ, that the defendant will pay the amount of
money, debts or credits, or value of the property sought to be released, in
lawful money of the United States.
2. The value of the property sought to be
released, if disputed, shall be determined by the court or judge thereof, upon
proof or by a sworn appraiser or sworn appraisers, not exceeding three, to be
appointed by the court or judge for that purpose.
3. Before filing the undertaking, the
defendant shall serve a copy thereof upon the plaintiff, and if the plaintiff
require a justification by the sureties, the plaintiff shall give notice
thereof to the defendant within 2 days; or at the time of giving notice of motion
for an order to discharge the attachment, the defendant may in the defendant’s
notice name the sureties, and if the plaintiff require them to justify the
plaintiff shall give notice thereof at the hearing of the motion. If required,
the sureties shall justify before the court in which the suit is pending, or
the judge thereof, after reasonable notice.
[1911 CPA § 222; RL § 5164; NCL § 8720]—(NRS A 1961,
421; 1973,
1180)
Notes of Decisions
Aronoff v. Katleman, 345 P.2d 221 (Nev. 1959).
· cites it 2× ““Whenever the defendant shall have appeared in the action, he may apply, upon reasonable notice to the plaintiff, to the court in which the action is pending, or to the judge thereof, for an order to discharge the attachment, wholly or in part, upon the execution and filing of…”
United Pac. Ins. v. Chism Homes, Inc., 728 P.2d 809 (Nev. 1986).
· cites it 16× “*498 Although subsection (2) of NRS 31.190 2 does appear to place a duty upon the court to determine the value of property, United Pacific correctly abstained from arguing this subsection.”
Covrig v. Powers, 332 P.2d 650 (Nev. 1958).
“180 providing that the defendant, after appearance, may apply to the court on notice for a discharge of the attachment upon the execution and filing of an undertaking — the amount of such undertaking, under NRS 31.190, varying with the condition as to whether the attached…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.190(1) — 1 case
United Pac. Ins. v. Chism Homes, Inc., 728 P.2d 809 (Nev. 1986).
“*498 Although subsection (2) of NRS 31.190 2 does appear to place a duty upon the court to determine the value of property, United Pacific correctly abstained from arguing this subsection.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.190(l)(a) — 1 case
United Pac. Ins. v. Chism Homes, Inc., 728 P.2d 809 (Nev. 1986).
“*498 Although subsection (2) of NRS 31.190 2 does appear to place a duty upon the court to determine the value of property, United Pacific correctly abstained from arguing this subsection.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.190(l)(b) — 1 case
United Pac. Ins. v. Chism Homes, Inc., 728 P.2d 809 (Nev. 1986).
“*498 Although subsection (2) of NRS 31.190 2 does appear to place a duty upon the court to determine the value of property, United Pacific correctly abstained from arguing this subsection.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.