judyrecords
search tips
630 million+
United States Court Cases

Nevada Supreme/Appellate Court Record

CALLOWAY VS. CITY OF RENO

Case Information: 25628
Short Caption:CALLOWAY VS. CITY OF RENOCourt:Supreme Court
Lower Court Case(s):Washoe Co. - Second Judicial District - CV896508Classification:Civil Appeal - General - Other
Disqualifications:SpringerCase Status:Remittitur Issued/Case Closed
Replacement:Panel Assigned: En Banc
To SP/Judge:SP Status:
Oral Argument:10/17/1996 at 8:45 AMOral Argument Location:Carson City
Submission Date:10/17/1996How Submitted:

+ Party Information

Docket Entries
DateTypeDescriptionPending?Document
05/24/1994Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Robert C. Maddox & Associates-Check No. 11884.
05/24/1994Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Perry & Spann--Check No. 027333.
05/24/1994Record on Appeal DocumentsFiled 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
06/07/1994Docketing StatementFiled Docketing Statement. Appellant/Cross-Respondent.
06/08/1994MotionFiled Motion. To Amend Caption.
06/08/1994Other Other. Filing Notice.
06/14/1994Other 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.
06/15/1994Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. Cross-Appeal fee of $100 from Beasley, Holden & Kern--Check No. 12557.
06/15/1994Other 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).
06/15/1994Docketing StatementFiled Docketing Statement. Of Cross-Appellant.
06/29/1994MotionFiled Stipulation and Order. Appellants may have to and including July 15, 1994, to file the opening brief.
07/08/1994MotionFiled Motion and Order Extending Time. Appellants may file the opening brief in excess of 30 pages; to wit 40 pages.
07/13/1994Order/ProceduralFiled 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).
07/15/1994BriefFiled Brief. Filing Appellants' Opening Brief.
08/02/1994MotionFiled Stipulation and Order. Respondent/Cross-Appellant shall have to and including September 14, 1994, to file the Answering Brief.
08/11/1994MotionFiled Stipulation and Order. Respondents/Cross-Appellants shall have to and including September 14, 1994, to file the Answering Brief.
09/14/1994BriefFiled Brief. Respondent's Brief (City of Reno).
09/14/1994MotionFiled Motion. For Order Allowing Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction to file enlarged brief (67 pages).
09/14/1994BriefReceived Brief. Answering/Opening Brief of Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction.
10/03/1994Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
10/03/1994BriefFiled Brief. Answering/(Opening) Brief of Respondent/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction.
10/12/1994MotionFiled Stipulation. Regarding extension of time within which to file briefs.
11/18/1994BriefReceived Brief. Answering Brief of Cross-Respondents Highland Construction Company, Inc., and Offenhauser and Oetjen, Inc..
11/18/1994Other Other. Received Joinder in Answering Brief (Offenhauser Development Company).
11/18/1994Other Other. Received Joinder of Cross-Respondent Sparks Roofing and Siding Service, Inc..
11/22/1994Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Of Firm Change (Maddox & Robertson is now Maddox & Saint-Aubin).
11/22/1994MotionFiled Motion. For Enlargement of Page Limit for Appellants' Reply/Answering Brief.
11/22/1994BriefReceived Brief. Appellants' Reply/Answering Brief.
12/02/1994MotionFiled Stipulation. Regarding Extension of Time WithinWhich to file Reply Brief.
12/12/1994MotionFiled 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.
12/12/1994BriefReceived Brief. Amicus Brief of Consulting Engineers Council and Builders Association.
12/13/1994MotionFiled Stipulation. Regarding extension of time within which to file Respondents/Cross-Appellants' Brief (P & H Construction., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction).
12/22/1994Other 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.
01/17/1995BriefReceived Brief. Cross-Appellant's Reply Brief. (Respondent/Cross-Appellant City of Reno).
01/23/1995MotionFiled Stipulation. Regarding Extension of Time within which to file Respondents/Cross-Appellants Brief.
01/30/1995MotionFiled Motion. For Leave to file Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Amicus Brief; proposed Reply.
02/06/1995Other Other. Filing Appellants' Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Reply to Opposition to Motion for Leave to file Amicus Brief.
04/27/1995Letter/IncomingReceived Letter. From Attorney Robert C. Maddox re: case caption.
06/22/1995Other Other. Filing Substitution of Attorney: Lemons, Grundy & Eisenberg in place and instead of Perry & Spann as counsel for the City of Reno.
08/16/1995Other Other. Returned, unfiled, proper person Motion to Consolidate Appeal Issues. (Submitted by Hal Gazin, not a party to this appeal.)
10/20/1995Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
10/20/1995BriefFiled Brief. Answering Brief of Cross-Respondents Highland Construction Company, Inc., and Offenhauser and Oetjen, Inc..
10/20/1995Other Other. Filing Joinder in Answering Brief (Offenhauser Development Company).
10/20/1995Other Other. Filing Joinder of Cross-Respondent Sparks Roofing and Siding Service, Inc..
10/20/1995BriefFiled Brief. Appellants' Reply Answering Brief.
10/20/1995BriefFiled Brief. Cross-Appellant's Reply Brief (City of Reno).
10/20/1995BriefFiled Brief. Amicus Brief of Consulting Engineers Council of Nevada and Builders Association of Northern Nevada.
11/03/1995Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Change of Address of Attorney Cecilia L. Rosenauer.
11/09/1995Other Other. Filing Response to Order to Show Cause (P & H Construction, Poehland and John Carl Construction Company).
11/17/1995MotionFiled Motion. To the Honorable Chief Justice Thomas Steffen and to the Associate Justices of the Nevada Supreme Court (additional time for oral argument).
11/17/1995Other 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).
11/17/1995Other Other. Filing Appellants' Supplemental Reply to Amicus Brief. (Delivered Reno/Carson Msgr. 11/17/95).
11/22/1995MotionFiled Motion. For Relief from Order.jb
11/30/1995Other Other. Filing Joinder in Motion for Relief from Order.
12/20/1995Other Other. Filing Supplemental Authorities to Answering Brief of Respondents/Cross-Appellants P & H Construction, Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction.
02/26/1996Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
03/22/1996Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
04/30/1996Other Other. Oral argument is scheduled for September 9, 1996, at the hour of 10:30 a.m.,-1 hour in Carson City.
07/26/1996Other Other. Filing Errata Regarding city of Reno's Answering Brief filed September14, 1994. (Original and copies corrected).
08/23/1996Other Other. Filing Appellants' Supplemenatal Memorandum of Authorities.
08/30/1996Other Other. Filing Appellants' Response to P & H Construction, Inc.'s, Clarence Poehland's and John Carl Construction's Supplemental Authorities.
09/09/1996Other Other. Oral Argument vacated due to illness of appellant's counsel. To be rescheduled at a later date.
09/12/1996Other Other. Oral argument is rescheduled for October 17, 1996, at the hour of 8:45a.m. 1 1/2 hr. in Carson City.
09/19/1996Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
09/19/1996MotionFiled 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).
09/25/1996Order/ProceduralFiled 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].
09/25/1996MotionFiled Response to Motion. Filing opposition to motion of respondents re enlargement of time for oral arguments.
10/04/1996Letter/IncomingReceived Letter. From attorney Robert C. Maddox regarding allocation of time for oral argument on appeal (Order filed September 25, 1996).
10/17/1996Other Other. Oral argument: Submitted.
10/17/1996Case Status Update Submitted for Decision.
02/03/1997MotionFiled Motion. For leave to file supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/ cross-appellant City of Reno.
02/03/1997Other Other. Received proposed supplemental citations of authority on behalf of appellant/cross-respondent City of Reno.
02/11/1997MotionFiled 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.
02/20/1997Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
02/20/1997Other Other. Filed (Proposed) supplemental citations of authority on behalf of appellant/cross-respondent City of Reno.
02/27/1997MotionFiled Motion. Appellant's motion for leave to file response to City of Reno's supplemental citation of authority.
02/27/1997Other Other. Received appellants' proposed response to supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/cross-appellant City of Reno.
03/14/1997Order/ProceduralFiled Case Processing Order. We grant the motion to file a response. The clerk shall forthwith file the response provisionally submitted on February 27, 1997.
03/14/1997Other Other. Filed appellants' (proposed) response to supplemental citation of authority on behalf of respondent/cross-appellant City of Reno.
05/22/1997Opinion/DispositionalFiled 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.
06/03/1997Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Respondents P & H Construction Inc.'s, Clarence Poehland's and John Carl Construction Company's petition for rehearing.
06/04/1997Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Filed the City of Reno's joinder in petition for rehearing.
06/05/1997Other Other. Filed appellant's Bill of Costs. STRICKEN by order 1/25/99.
06/11/1997Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Answer to Petition for Rehearing. Respondents P & H Construction Inc., Clarence Poehland and John Carl Construction Company.
05/20/1998Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Change of firm name.
12/03/1998Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
12/03/1998Other 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.
01/25/1999Order/ProceduralFiled 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).
06/03/1999MotionFiled 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.
06/03/1999BriefReceived Brief. For petitioners Municipalities and Counties in the State of Nevada. Mailed on 6/2/99-FedEx
06/10/1999Other Other. Received remaining original signature pages for motion for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief.
02/29/2000Opinion/DispositionalFiled 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
02/29/2000Other 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.
03/13/2000Notice/IncomingFiled 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.)
03/13/2000MotionFiled Motion to Extend Time. Filed motion for order enlarging time for filing petition for rehearing.
03/20/2000Order/ProceduralFiled 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.
04/19/2000Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from Robert Maddox--check no. 13588.
04/19/2000MotionFiled Motion for Excess Pages. Motion for Permission to File Petition for Rehearing in Excess of Ten Pages.
04/19/2000Post-Judgment PetitionReceived Petition for Rehearing.
04/20/2000MotionFiled Motion. Motion by Nevada Trial Lawyers Association for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petition for Rehearing.
04/20/2000BriefReceived Amicus Brief. Amicus Curiae Brief of the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association in Support of Petition for Rehearing.
04/20/2000Order/ProceduralFiled Order Granting Motion. The clerk of this court shall file appellants' 15-page petition for rehearing, submitted provisionally on April 19, 2000, forthwith.
04/20/2000Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing.
04/28/2000Letter/IncomingFiled Letter. from attorney Robert Eisenberg re: filing of opposition to petition for rehearing.
05/01/2000Letter/IncomingFiled Letter. from Thomas P. Beko regarding letter from Robert Eisenberg and Petition for Rehearing.
10/03/2000Post-Judgment OrderFiled 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
10/03/2000BriefFiled Amicus Brief. Amicus Curiae Brief of the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association in Support of Petition for Rehearing.
10/19/2000RemittiturIssued Remittitur. Record on Appeal, Vols. 1 through 23 returned this day. 00-17503
10/19/2000Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.
10/25/2000RemittiturFiled Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on October 23, 2000. 00-17503
03/19/2002MotionFiled Motion. Motion for Release of Appeal Bond. 02-04935
06/03/2002Order/ProceduralFiled 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