Nevada Supreme Court, 1974

Raishbrook v. Estate of Bayley

Raishbrook v. Estate of Bayley
Nevada Supreme Court · Decided December 11, 1974 · Per Curiam
528 P.2d 1331; 90 Nev. 415; 1974 Nev. LEXIS 412 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series)

Raishbrook v. Estate of Bayley

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

Because the record on appeal contains neither a transcript nor any statement of the evidence adduced in the court below, *416 which we deem essential to determination of contentions presented to us, the order appealed from is affirmed. When evidence on which a district court’s judgment rests is not properly included in the record on appeal, it is assumed that the record supports the lower court’s findings. NRAP 10; City of Las Vegas v. Bolden, 89 Nev. 526, 516 P.2d 110 (1973); Meakin v. Meakin, 88 Nev. 25, 492 P.2d 1304 (1972); Leeming v. Leeming, 87 Nev. 530, 490 P.2d 342 (1971); Pfister v. Shelton, 69 Nev. 309, 250 P.2d 239 (1952). 1

1

Appellant’s present counsel were substituted for prior counsel, to argue this appeal, after the time for docketing the record had passed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.