Summary
treating the failure to file an answering brief as a confession of error
Summary of this case from Plumbers Local Union No. 519 Pension Tr. Fund v. ErgenOpinion
No. 13413
December 31, 1981
Appeal from order granting petition to perpetuate testimony, Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Carl J. Christensen, Judge.
Vargas Bartlett, and Christopher L. Kaempfer, Las Vegas, for Appellant.
James E. Barfield, Las Vegas, for Respondent.
OPINION
An affidavit submitted by appellant indicates that its opening brief was mailed to respondent on August 31, 1981. No answering brief has been filed, nor has respondent replied to an order to show cause why his failure to file an answering brief should not be treated as a confession of error. Respondent's brief is now two months late. We consequently assume that respondent concedes the validity of appellant's contentions, and we elect to treat his failure to respond as a confession of error. NRAP 31(c); State of Rhode Island v. Prins, 96 Nev. 565, 613 P.2d 408 (1980); Kitchen Factors, Inc. v. Brown, 91 Nev. 308, 535 P.2d 677 (1975); Toiyabe Supply Co. v. Arcade, 74 Nev. 314, 330 P.2d 121 (1958). The district court's order granting respondent's petition to perpetuate testimony is reversed.