Schroeder v. Glyman

court weighed the appropriate factors, including the length of the delay, the effect of the delay on the timely prosecution of the case, and the lack of good cause to excuse the delay.' Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

Gibbons

Saitta cc: Hon. Kathleen E. Delaney, District Judge

Stephen E. Haberfeld, Settlement Judge

Lewis & Associates, LLC

Hutchison & Steffen, LLC

Eighth District Court Clerk

1-To the extent that appellant argues that the district court's dismissal of the case was inconsistent with the medical/dental panel's conclusion that good cause existed to waive the rule requiring malpractice actions to be brought within two years, appellant did not present this argument to the district court, and thus, we decline to address it on appeal. See Mason v. Cuisenaire, 122 Nev. 43, 48, 128 P.3d 446, 449 (2006) ("Generally, failure to raise an argument in the district court proceedings precludes a party from presenting the argument on appeal.").