Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.460
New trials and appeals
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 31.460 New trials and appeals. Motions
for new trial may be made in the same time and manner and shall be allowed for
the same grounds in garnishment proceedings as in other civil trials; and
appeals may be taken and prosecuted from any final judgment or order in such
proceedings as in other civil cases.
[1911 CPA § 249; RL § 5191; NCL § 8747]
ARREST AND BAIL
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2008–2022 · leading case: Frank Settelmeyer & Sons, Inc. v. Smith & Harmer, Ltd.
Frank Settelmeyer & Sons, Inc. v. Smith & Harmer, Ltd. (2008)
“We disagree, since the district court’s order on garnishment was a final order in the garnishment proceeding, rendered against the receiver as the garnishee defendant, and therefore appealable by the receiver under NRS 31.460 and NRAP 3A. Under NRAP 3A(a), only aggrieved parties…”
RAWSON VS. DIST. CT. (CAIN) (2017)
“Further, in analyzing the statutes governing postjudgment garnishment proceedings, this court recognized that garnishment proceedings are independent from the underlying action and that the resulting judgment in favor of or against the garnishee defendant constitutes a final…”
Clark NMSD, LLC v. Goldstein (2022)
“, NRS 31.460 (providing that an appeal may be taken from any final judgment in a garnishment proceeding, as in other civil cases); accord Frank Settelmeyer & Sons, Inc.”
Mona, Jr. v. Far West Indus. (2018)
“3d 1051 (2008) provides for an appeal from a final judgment in a garnishment action (see also NRS 31.460), but not from interlocutory orders that merely set the priorities or resolve a claim of exemption, such as those at issue in this appeal.”
Oxner v. Utts (2018)
“3d 1051 (2008) (providing for an appeal from a final judgment in a garnishment or execution action (see also NRS 31.460), but not from interlocutory orders that merely set the priorities or resolve a claim of exemption).”
RAWSON VS. DIST. CT. (CAIN) (2017)
“Further, in analyzing the statutes governing postjudgment garnishment proceedings, this court recognized that garnishment proceedings are independent from the underlying action and that the resulting judgment in favor of or against the garnishee defendant constitutes a final…”
Superpumper, Inc. Vs. Leonard (2020)
“3d 1051 (2008) provides for an appeal from a final judgment in a garnishment or execution action (see also NRS 31.460), but not from interlocutory orders that merely set the priorities or resolve a claim of exemption.”
Murray Vs. A Cab Taxi Serv. Llc (2020)
“Thus, the district court's postjudgment order is not appealable under NRS 31.460. As it does not appear that the challenged order is otherwise appealable at this time, we conclude that this court lacks jurisdiction, and we grant the motion to dismiss and ORDER this appeal…”
Fowler v. Am. Textile Maint. Co. (2022)
“Appellant argues that the district court applied the wrong standards in holding that respondent is entitled to enforce the writ of garnishment against her and cites NRS 31.460, providing for an appeal from any final judgment in a garnishment proceeding.”
Fowler v. Am. Textile Maint. Co. (2022)
“Appellant argues that the district court applied the wrong standards in holding that respondent is entitled to enforce the writ of garnishment against her and cites NRS 31.460, providing for an appeal from any final judgment in a garnishment proceeding.”
incorporate-us.com, LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Hernandez) (2015)
“330; NRS 31.460; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev.”
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.