NEVADA CONTRACT LAW
Editor’s note: This outline was last updated 2013. Use with caution.
I. CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS
Failure of Consideration
When a written contract is shown to be a sham, neither party is under an obligation to the other. See Schieve v. Warren, 87 Nev. 42, 482 P.2d 301 (1971).
Benefit conferred or detriment incurred in past is not adequate consideration for present bargain. See Clark County v. Bonanza No. 1, 96 Nev. 643, 615 P.2d 939 (1980). Continue reading Nevada Contract Law: A Digest
The following abstract explores the law regarding punitive damages in Nevada. This article was last updated in 2013. Use with caution.
Punitive damages are not designed to compensate a party, but are awarded for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant. NRS 42.010(1). By assessing the gravity of the injury, punitive damages serve as a vehicle for a community to express outrage or distaste for a defendant’s misconduct while warning others that such wrongdoing will not be tolerated. Ace Truck v. Kahn, 103 Nev. 503, 506, 746 P.2d 132, 134 (1987). Allowing punitive damages provides a benefit to society by punishing undesirable conduct that is not punishable by the criminal law. Id. Therefore, the party whose conduct was so outrageous as to merit punishment by means of punitive damages is obligated to bear the burden of paying the award, which effectuates the goals of punishment of and deterrence. New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. Gruhn, 99 Nev. 771, 774, 670 P.2d 941, 943 (1983). Continue reading Punitive Damages in Nevada