Lewis v. Walker (In re Guardianship of Ford)

Full title: IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF GERALDINE…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Mar 31, 2017

No. 69452 (Nev. App. Mar. 31, 2017)

Opinion

No. 69452

03-31-2017

IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF GERALDINE FORD, AN ADULT WARD. WINONA LEWIS, Appellant, v. ELVIN WALKER; AND WILLIE JEAN WALKER, Respondents.

Silver

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a district court order awarding attorney fees and costs in a guardianship action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; Cynthia Dianne Steel, Judge.

Appellant filed a petition seeking to terminate the guardianship respondents had over the adult ward, who is appellant's aunt. Appellant also sought to have herself appointed as her aunt's guardian in respondents' place. After both parties conducted discovery, they proceeded to a hearing on the motions. At that hearing, appellant explained that she had also filed a wrongful death suit against respondents and asked to dismiss her petition for guardianship, without prejudice, until that case was completed.

Following the hearing, respondents filed a motion for attorney fees and costs arguing that appellant only filed her petition to harass them and that her action was maintained without reasonable grounds because she lacked the physical and financial capacity to act as the ward's guardian. See NRS 18.010(2)(b) (giving district courts the discretion to award attorney fees to prevailing parties when an action was brought or maintained without reasonable grounds or to harass). After noting the withdrawal of appellant's guardianship petition, the district court granted the motion¹ over appellant's opposition and this appeal followed.²

1 The district court did not award the full amount of fees, however, as it denied the request for fees that predated appellant's filings in the case.

2 Appellant does not challenge the award of costs and, therefore, we necessarily affirm that award.

Having reviewed the parties' arguments and the record on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding respondents their attorney fees. See Stubbs v. Strickland, 129 Nev. 146, 152, 297 P.3d 326, 330 (2013) (reviewing an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.010(2)(b) for an abuse of discretion). Here, the district court concluded that appellant brought and maintained her action without reasonable grounds, and that conclusion is supported by the record. See Ogawa v. Ogawa, 125 Nev. 660, 668, 221 P.3d 699, 704 (2009) (explaining that a district court's factual findings will not be set aside unless they are clearly erroneous or not supported by substantial evidence). Accordingly, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.³

3 Because we affirm the award under NRS 18.010(2)(b), we need not consider appellant's argument that the award was improper under NRCP 11. We also do not address the amount of the award, as appellant did not raise any arguments in that regard on appeal. Finally, we have considered appellant's remaining arguments and conclude that they do not provide a basis upon which to overturn the district court's order. --------

/s/_________, C.J.

Silver

/s/_________, J.

Tao

/s/_________, J.

Gibbons cc: Hon. Cynthia Dianne Steel, District Judge, Family Court Division

Carolyn Worrell, Settlement Judge

Winona Lewis

Cuthbert Mack Chtd.

Eighth District Court Clerk