Nevada Supreme Court, 1980

Daniel v. Hiegel

Daniel v. Hiegel
Nevada Supreme Court · Decided May 22, 1980
96 Nev. 456; 611 P.2d 207; 1980 Nev. LEXIS 617

Daniel v. Hiegel

Opinion of the Court

*457OPINION

Per Curiam:

On conflicting evidence the district court found that an oral agreement was made between Ruth Hiegel Daniel and her former husband, John Maurice Hiegel, now deceased, pursuant to which Ruth was to convey her interest in Exley House to John for $8600. A promissory note, deed of trust and divorce complaint, apparently executed pursuant to the oral agreement, when considered together constitute a sufficient memorandum of the agreement satisfying the statute of frauds. NRS 111.210(1); Ray Motor Lodge, Inc., v. Shatz, 80 Nev. 114, 390 P.2d 42 (1969); Haspray v. Pasarelli, 79 Nev. 203, 380 P.2d 919 (1963). We do not perceive an appellate issue of merit.

Affirmed.

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