| Docket Entries |
| Date | Type | Description | Pending? | Document |
| 05/24/1994 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Robert C. Maddox & Associates-Check No. 11884. | | |
| 05/24/1994 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Perry & Spann--Check No. 027333. | | |
| 05/24/1994 | Record on Appeal Documents | Filed Record on Appeal. Vols. 1 through 23*(originals). (Docketing Statement mailed to counsel for appellants and cross-appellants).
*Received 23 volumes, not 24 as originally noted.lc | | |
| 06/07/1994 | Docketing Statement | Filed Docketing Statement. Appellant/Cross-Respondent. | | |
| 06/08/1994 | Motion | Filed Motion. To Amend Caption. | | |
| 06/08/1994 | Other | Other. Filing Notice. | | |
| 06/14/1994 | Other | Other. Received certified copy of "Judgment" filed May 10, 1994, from the Washoe County Clerk, and placed in the Record on Appeal, Vol. 23 as pages 8163 to 8165. | | |
| 06/15/1994 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. Cross-Appeal fee of $100 from Beasley, Holden & Kern--Check No. 12557. | | |
| 06/15/1994 | Other | Other. Received the Notice of Cross-Appeal of P & H Construction Company and Clarence Poehland filed June 9, 1994 an placed in the Record on Appeal, Vol. 23 as pages 8166 through 8168 (original). (Added P&H to the docket sheet 6/15/94). | | |
| 06/15/1994 | Docketing Statement | Filed Docketing Statement. Of Cross-Appellant. | | |
| 06/29/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Appellants may have to and including July 15, 1994, to file the opening brief. | | |
| 07/08/1994 | Motion | Filed Motion and Order Extending Time. Appellants may file the opening brief in excess of 30 pages; to wit 40 pages. | | |
| 07/13/1994 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. We grant appellants' unopposed motion to amend the caption in this matter. The clerk shall amend the caption on this court's docket consistent with the caption appearing on this order. (Caption corrected 7/13/94). | | |
| 07/15/1994 | Brief | Filed Brief. Filing Appellants' Opening Brief. | | |
| 08/02/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Respondent/Cross-Appellant shall have to and including September 14, 1994, to file the Answering Brief. | | |
| 08/11/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Respondents/Cross-Appellants shall have to and including September 14, 1994, to file the Answering Brief. | | |
| 09/14/1994 | Brief | Filed Brief. Respondent's Brief (City of Reno). | | |
| 09/14/1994 | Motion | Filed Motion. For Order Allowing Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction to file enlarged brief (67 pages). | | |
| 09/14/1994 | Brief | Received Brief. Answering/Opening Brief of Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction. | | |
| 10/03/1994 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. We grant the motion of P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction for leave to file a 67 page brief. The clerk shall file the answering brief of respondents P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction, submitted provisionally with the motion, forthwith. Appellants shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file the reply brief. | | |
| 10/03/1994 | Brief | Filed Brief. Answering/(Opening) Brief of Respondent/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction. | | |
| 10/12/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation. Regarding extension of time within which to file briefs. | | |
| 11/18/1994 | Brief | Received Brief. Answering Brief of Cross-Respondents Highland Construction Company, Inc., and Offenhauser and Oetjen, Inc.. | | |
| 11/18/1994 | Other | Other. Received Joinder in Answering Brief (Offenhauser Development Company). | | |
| 11/18/1994 | Other | Other. Received Joinder of Cross-Respondent Sparks Roofing and Siding Service, Inc.. | | |
| 11/22/1994 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Of Firm Change (Maddox & Robertson is now Maddox & Saint-Aubin). | | |
| 11/22/1994 | Motion | Filed Motion. For Enlargement of Page Limit for Appellants' Reply/Answering Brief. | | |
| 11/22/1994 | Brief | Received Brief. Appellants' Reply/Answering Brief. | | |
| 12/02/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation. Regarding Extension of Time WithinWhich to file Reply Brief. | | |
| 12/12/1994 | Motion | Filed Motion. For leave to file Consulting Engineers Council of Nevada's and Builders Association of Northern Nevada's Amicus Brief and motion for leave to file brief exceeding thirty pages, to-wit 38 pages. | | |
| 12/12/1994 | Brief | Received Brief. Amicus Brief of Consulting Engineers Council and Builders Association. | | |
| 12/13/1994 | Motion | Filed Stipulation. Regarding extension of time within which to file Respondents/Cross-Appellants' Brief (P & H Construction., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction). | | |
| 12/22/1994 | Other | Other. Filing Appellants' Opposition to Consulting Engineers Counsel of Nevada's and Builders Association of Northern Nevada's Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief. | | |
| 01/17/1995 | Brief | Received Brief. Cross-Appellant's Reply Brief. (Respondent/Cross-Appellant City of Reno). | | |
| 01/23/1995 | Motion | Filed Stipulation. Regarding Extension of Time within which to file Respondents/Cross-Appellants Brief. | | |
| 01/30/1995 | Motion | Filed Motion. For Leave to file Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Amicus Brief; proposed Reply. | | |
| 02/06/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Appellants' Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Amicus Brief. | | |
| 04/27/1995 | Letter/Incoming | Received Letter. From Attorney Robert C. Maddox re: case caption. | | |
| 06/22/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Substitution of Attorney: Lemons, Grundy & Eisenberg in place and instead of Perry & Spann as counsel for the City of Reno. | | |
| 08/16/1995 | Other | Other. Returned, unfiled, proper person Motion to Consolidate Appeal Issues. (Submitted by Hal Gazin, not a party to this appeal.) | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. On June 8, 1994, prior to the commencement of briefing, appellants moved to amend the caption in this matter. We entered an order on July 13, 1994, granting the motion. The parties subsequently filed various motions concerning the briefing schedule. We conclude that modification of the briefing schedule is warranted. APPEAL OF THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION. Highland Construction, Inc., and Offenhauser Development Company shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file a supplemental answering brief which responds to appellants' strict products liability argument. CROSS-APPEAL OF P & H CONSTRUCTION AND CLARENCE POEHLAND. P & H and Poehland shall have 20 days from the date of this order to show cause why this court should not dismiss their cross-appeal and disapprove, as moot, their stipulations filed December 13, 1994, and January 23, 1995, for extensions of time to file a reply brief on cross-appeal. In spite of the apparent lack of jurisdiction over P & H and Poehland's cross-appeal, it appears that we are not required to strike from these parties' answering brief the argument raised on cross-appeal. Therefore, an acknowledgment by P & H and Poehland that this court lacks jurisdiction over their cross-appeal will not require the striking of the argument originally tendered on cross-appeal. Instead, the argument will simply be deemed a proper argument in the answering brief in support of the judgment. CROSS-APPEAL OF THE CITY OF RENO. The City of Reno has cross-appealed from the order dismissing its cross-claim for indemnification and contribution. The clerk of this court shall modify the caption on this court's docket consistent with the caption appearing on this order. PENDING MOTIONS REGARDING BRIEFING. The clerk of this court shall forthwith file Highland Construction and Offenhauser and Oetjen's answering brief, and the (2) joinders in this brief, submitted on November 18, 1994. The clerk shall file "Appellants' Reply/Answering Brief" submitted provisionally on November 22, 1994. The Clerk shall file the City of Reno's reply brief on cross-appeal submitted provisionally on January 17, 1995. We grant the motion filed December 12, 1994 by the Consulting Engineers Council of Nevada and the Builders Association of Northern Nevada ("amici curiae") seeking leave to file an amici curiae brief in support of respondents' position on appeal. The clerk shall forthwith file the proposed amici brief, submitted provisionally on December 12, 1994. Appellants shall have 30 days form the date of this order to file a supplemental reply brief to the amici curiae brief. SCHEDULING OF ORAL ARGUMENT. The clerk shall schedule this matter for oral argument on the next available argument calendar. Argument shall be limited to 60 minutes. | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Brief | Filed Brief. Answering Brief of Cross-Respondents Highland Construction Company, Inc., and Offenhauser and Oetjen, Inc.. | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Joinder in Answering Brief (Offenhauser Development Company). | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Joinder of Cross-Respondent Sparks Roofing and Siding Service, Inc.. | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Brief | Filed Brief. Appellants' Reply Answering Brief. | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Brief | Filed Brief. Cross-Appellant's Reply Brief (City of Reno). | | |
| 10/20/1995 | Brief | Filed Brief. Amicus Brief of Consulting Engineers Council of Nevada and Builders Association of Northern Nevada. | | |
| 11/03/1995 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Change of Address of Attorney Cecilia L. Rosenauer. | | |
| 11/09/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Response to Order to Show Cause (P & H Construction, Poehland and John Carl Construction Company). | | |
| 11/17/1995 | Motion | Filed Motion. To the Honorable Chief Justice Thomas Steffen and to the Associate Justices of the Nevada Supreme Court (additional time for oral argument). | | |
| 11/17/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Response of Respondents P & H Construction Inc., Clarence Poehland, and John Carl Construction Company to Appellant's argument re: Strict Products Liability (Respondents Supplemental Answering Brief). (hand delivered Reno-Carson 11/17/95). | | |
| 11/17/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Appellants' Supplemental Reply to Amicus Brief. (Delivered Reno/Carson Msgr. 11/17/95). | | |
| 11/22/1995 | Motion | Filed Motion. For Relief from Order.jb | | |
| 11/30/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Joinder in Motion for Relief from Order. | | |
| 12/20/1995 | Other | Other. Filing Supplemental Authorities to Answering Brief of Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction. | | |
| 02/26/1996 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. On October 20, 1995, this court issued an order in this matter directing P & H and Poehland to show cause why this court should not dismiss their cross-appeal and disapprove as moot their stipulation filed December 13, 1994, and January 23, 1995, for an extension of time to file a reply on cross-appeal. 1[The motion for relief and joinder in motion for relief from portions of this order filed on November 22 and November 30, 1995, and the motion for additional time for oral argument filed on November 17, 1995, will be addressed in a separate order of this court]. On November 9, 1995, P & H and Poehland filed in this court their response to our order to show cause. We dismiss the cross-appeal filed by P & H and Poehland, and we dismiss as moot their stipulations filed December 13, 1994, and January 23, 1995, for extensions of time to file a reply brief on cross-appeal. The clerk of this court shall modify the caption on this court's docket consistent with the caption appearing on this order. | | |
| 03/22/1996 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. On October 20, 1995, we entered an order in which we directed Highland Construction and Offenhauser Development to file a supplemental answering brief which responded to the argument in appellants' opening brief concerning strict products liability. On November 22, 1995, respondents Highland Construction, Inc. and Offenhauser and Oetjen Construction, Inc. filed a motion seeking relief from our order. On November 30, 1995, Offenhauser Development filed a joinder in the motion. 2[On November 17, 1995, respondents Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction Company filed a resonse to appellants' arugument regarding strict Products liability]. We grant respondents' motion. That portion of our October 20, 1995, order directing Highland Construction and Offenhauser Development to file a supplemental answering brief is hereby vacated. On November 17, 1995, respondents filed a motion to enlarge the amount of time allotted for oral argument. We deny the motion for an enlargement of the allotted oral argument time. The clerk of this court shall schedule this matter for oral argument on the next available argument calendar. Argument shall remain limited to one hour. | | |
| 04/30/1996 | Other | Other. Oral argument is scheduled for September 9, 1996, at the hour of 10:30 a.m.,-1 hour in Carson City. | | |
| 07/26/1996 | Other | Other. Filing Errata Regarding city of Reno's Answering Brief filed September14, 1994. (Original and copies corrected). | | |
| 08/23/1996 | Other | Other. Filing Appellants' Supplemenatal Memorandum of Authorities. | | |
| 08/30/1996 | Other | Other. Filing Appellants' Response to P & H Construction, Inc.'s, Clarence Poehland's and John Carl Construction's Supplemental Authorities. | | |
| 09/09/1996 | Other | Other. Oral Argument vacated due to illness of appellant's counsel. To be rescheduled at a later date. | | |
| 09/12/1996 | Other | Other. Oral argument is rescheduled for October 17, 1996, at the hour of 8:45a.m. 1 1/2 hr. in Carson City. | | |
| 09/19/1996 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. We have determined that an extended oral argument may prove beneficial. We vacate those portions of our previous orders limiting oral argument to one hour. The clerk shall reschedule this matter for oral argument on October 17, 1996 at 8:45a.m. in Carson City. Oral argument shall be limited to 90 minutes. | | |
| 09/19/1996 | Motion | Filed Motion. To the Honorable Chief Justice Thomas Steffan and to the Associate Justices of the Nevada Supreme Court (motion for additional time for oral argument). | | |
| 09/25/1996 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. On September 19, 1996, respondents P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland, and John Carl Construction Company, filed a motion to enlarge the amount of time allotted for oral argument to 80 minutes. On the same day, this court sua sponte enlarged the amount of time allotted for oral argument to 90 minutes and directed the clerk of this court to schedule oral argument on October 17, 1996, at 8:45a.m. in Carson City. We deny respondents' motion as moot. Fn1[The parties to this appeal may agree to divide the 90 minutes allotted for oral argument among themselves in any manner they see fit. If at the time of oral argument the parties have reached an agreement regarding the allotment of time, they shall inform the court at the commencement of oral argument. If the parties fail to reach an agreement, the allotted 90 minutes shall be divided equally among the parties]. | | |
| 09/25/1996 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Filing opposition to motion of respondents re enlargement of time for oral arguments. | | |
| 10/04/1996 | Letter/Incoming | Received Letter. From attorney Robert C. Maddox regarding allocation of time for oral argument on appeal (Order filed September 25, 1996). | | |
| 10/17/1996 | Other | Other. Oral argument: Submitted. | | |
| 10/17/1996 | Case Status Update | Submitted for Decision. | | |
| 02/03/1997 | Motion | Filed Motion. For leave to file supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/ cross-appellant City of Reno. | | |
| 02/03/1997 | Other | Other. Received proposed supplemental citations of authority on behalf of appellant/cross-respondent City of Reno. | | |
| 02/11/1997 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Appellant's opposition to motion for leave to file supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/cross-appellant City of Reno. | | |
| 02/20/1997 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. We grant the motion for leave to file the supplemental citation. The clerk shall forthwith file the proposed supplemental citation of authority provisionally submitted on February 3, 1997. We express no opinion at this time as to whether the cited authority is actually substantively useful in the disposition of this appeal. | | |
| 02/20/1997 | Other | Other. Filed (Proposed) supplemental citations of authority on behalf of appellant/cross-respondent City of Reno. | | |
| 02/27/1997 | Motion | Filed Motion. Appellant's motion for leave to file response to City of Reno's supplemental citation of authority. | | |
| 02/27/1997 | Other | Other. Received appellants' proposed response to supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/cross-appellant City of Reno. | | |
| 03/14/1997 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. We grant the motion to file a response. The clerk shall forthwith file the response provisionally submitted on February 27, 1997. | | |
| 03/14/1997 | Other | Other. Filed appellants' (proposed) response to supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/cross-appellant City of Reno. | | |
| 05/22/1997 | Opinion/Dispositional | Filed Dispositional Opinion. "Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded." Per Curiam. Fn1[The Honorable A. William Maupin, Justice, did not participate in the decision of this appeal]. Adv. 58. OPINION WITHDRAWN BY ORDER 12/3/98. | | |
| 06/03/1997 | Post-Judgment Petition | Filed Petition for Rehearing. Respondents P & H Construction Inc.'s, Clarence Poehland's and John Carl Construction Company's petition for rehearing. | | |
| 06/04/1997 | Post-Judgment Petition | Filed Petition for Rehearing. Filed the City of Reno's joinder in petition for rehearing. | | |
| 06/05/1997 | Other | Other. Filed appellant's Bill of Costs. STRICKEN by order 1/25/99. | | |
| 06/11/1997 | Post-Judgment Petition | Filed Answer to Petition for Rehearing. Respondents P & H Construction Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction Company. | | |
| 05/20/1998 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Change of firm name. | | |
| 12/03/1998 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. Granting rehearing. On May 22, 1997, we issued an opinion reversing in part, affirming in part, and remanding for further proceedings. Thereafter, respondents
P & H Construction Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction Company filed a petition for rehearing. The City of Reno subsequently joined in the petition. " . . . we grant the petition and withdraw our opinion in this matter, Calloway v. City of Reno, 113 Nev. 564, 939 P.2d 1020 (1997)." On rehearing, this matter will be submitted on the record, the pleadings, and the tape recording of the oral argument conducted by this court on October 17, 1996. | | |
| 12/03/1998 | Other | Other. Case submitted on the record, the pleadings, and the tape recording of the oral argument conducted by this court on October 17, 1996 this day. | | |
| 01/25/1999 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. In light of the order granting rehearing and withdrawing our opinion, we direct the clerk of this court to strike the bill of costs filed on June 5, 1997, by appellants Calloway and Iacometti. (STRICKEN BY ORDER: APPELLANTS BILL OF COSTS FILED 6/5/97). | | |
| 06/03/1999 | Motion | Filed Motion. For leave to file an Amicus Curiae Brief on behalf of Municipalities and Counties in the State of Nevada. Mailed on 6/2/99-FedEx. | | |
| 06/03/1999 | Brief | Received Brief. For petitioners Municipalities and Counties in the State of Nevada. Mailed on 6/2/99-FedEx | | |
| 06/10/1999 | Other | Other. Received remaining original signature pages for motion for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief. | | |
| 02/29/2000 | Opinion/Dispositional | Filed Opinion on Rehearing. "Affirmed on rehearing." Before Rose, C.J., Young, Maupin, Shearing, and Agosti, JJ. Fn1[This matter was submitted for decision prior to expansion of the court from five to seven justices on January 4, 1999. Justice Maupin is successor in office to former Chief Justice Steffen, and Justice Agosti is successor in office to former Chief Justice Springer.] By the Court, Young, J. fn7[On June 3, 1999, two years after the rehearing petition was filed, various municipalities and counties filed a motion for leave to file an amicus curaie brief in support of the City's cross-appeal. In light of our conclusion that we lack jurisdiction to consider the City's cross-appeal, we deny the motion as moot.] Young, J. We concur: Shearing, J. and Agosti, J. Maupin, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. Rose, C.J., dissenting. 116 Adv. Opn. No. 24 5J-RR/CY/WM/MS/DA | | 01-00412
|
| 02/29/2000 | Other | Other. Returned unfiled with letter and copy of Opinion to the Harrison firm: original Amicus Brief for petitioners municipalities and counties in the State of Nevada received 6/3/99. | | |
| 03/13/2000 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Notice of appearance. Henry Egghart of counsel with Robert C. Maddox and Associates, as counsel for appellants. (Maddox & Associates was added as counsel for appellants on 5/21/98.) | | |
| 03/13/2000 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Filed motion for order enlarging time for filing petition for rehearing. | | |
| 03/20/2000 | Order/Procedural | Filed Case Processing Order. Granting motion. Appellants shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file their petition for rehearing in this matter. | | |
| 04/19/2000 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Robert Maddox--check no. 13588. | | |
| 04/19/2000 | Motion | Filed Motion for Excess Pages. Motion for Permission to File Petition for Rehearing in Excess of Ten Pages. | | |
| 04/19/2000 | Post-Judgment Petition | Received Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 04/20/2000 | Motion | Filed Motion. Motion by Nevada Trial Lawyers Association for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 04/20/2000 | Brief | Received Amicus Brief. Amicus Curiae Brief of the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association in Support of Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 04/20/2000 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. The clerk of this court shall file appellants' 15-page petition for rehearing, submitted provisionally on April 19, 2000, forthwith. | | |
| 04/20/2000 | Post-Judgment Petition | Filed Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 04/28/2000 | Letter/Incoming | Filed Letter. from attorney Robert Eisenberg re: filing of opposition to petition for rehearing. | | |
| 05/01/2000 | Letter/Incoming | Filed Letter. from Thomas P. Beko regarding letter from Robert Eisenberg and Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 10/03/2000 | Post-Judgment Order | Filed Order/Rehearing Denied. "Rehearing denied." fn1[This matter was submitted for decision prior to expansion of the court from five to seven justices on january 4, 1999. Justice maupin is successor in office to former Chief Justice Steffen, and Justice Agosti is successor in office to former Chief Justice Springer. On April 20, 2000, the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association filed a motion for leave to file an amicus curiae brief. We received the amicus curiae brief on the same day. We grant the motion and direct the clerk of this court to file the amicus curiae brief.] 5J-RR/CY/WM/MS/DA | | 00-17418
|
| 10/03/2000 | Brief | Filed Amicus Brief. Amicus Curiae Brief of the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association in Support of Petition for Rehearing. | | |
| 10/19/2000 | Remittitur | Issued Remittitur. Record on Appeal, Vols. 1 through 23 returned this day. | | 00-17503
|
| 10/19/2000 | Case Status Update | Remittitur Issued/Case Closed. | | |
| 10/25/2000 | Remittitur | Filed Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on October 23, 2000. | | 00-17503
|
| 03/19/2002 | Motion | Filed Motion. Motion for Release of Appeal Bond. | | 02-04935
|
| 06/03/2002 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Denying Motion. On October 19, 2002, we issued the remittitur in this appeal. On March 19, 2002, appellants filed a motion requesting the release of an appeal bond. Pursuant to NRAP 7, a bond for costs on appeal in civil cases is filed in the district court. Thus, any relief regarding the bond is properly sought in the district court, and not the supreme court. We deny the motion. | | 02-09625
|