Preview:

in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact remains in dispute and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id. To withstand summary judgment, the nonmoving party cannot rely solely on general allegations and conclusions set forth in the pleadings, but must instead present specific facts demonstrating the existence of a genuine factual issue supporting his claims. NRCP 56(e); see also Wood, 121 Nev. at 731,
121 P.3d at 1030-31.
Having reviewed the proper person appeal statement and record on appeal, we conclude that the district court properly awarded summary judgment in favor of respondents. In support of its motion, Don's D.I. Auto Service produced statements made by appellant that appellant's brother was the owner of the vehicle at the time of the fire, while appellant failed to produce any evidence showing that he owned, or partially owned, the vehicle at the time of the fire. Rather, the evidence produced by appellant supported Don's D.I. Auto Service's position that appellant's brother owned the vehicle at the time of the fire. As appellant failed to present specific facts demonstrating the existence of a genuine factual issue regarding ownership of the vehicle and his standing to maintain this action, see NRCP 56(e); Wood, 121 Nev. at 731, 121 P.3d at 1030-31, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Gibbons
(QA ,J. J. Douglas Saitta
2

cc: Hon. Joanna Kishner, District Judge Arthur E. Larson David L. Riddle & Associates Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA

3
(0) 1947A

Download 61417.pdf

Nevada Law