130 Nev., Advance Opinion 414.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
NEVADA ASSOCIATION SERVICES, No. 62748
INC.; AND PECCOLE RANCH
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION,
Petitioners,
vs.
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 0 4 2014
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF
CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE
SUSAN SCANN, DISTRICT JUDGE,
Respondents,
and
ELSINORE, LLC, ON BEHALF OF
ITSELF AND AS REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE CLASS DEFINED HEREIN;
AND G.J.L., INCORPORATED,
Real Parties in Interest.
Original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition
challenging a district court order denying a motion to dismiss and a
district court order denying a motion for summary judgment in a real
property action.
Petition granted in part and denied in part.
Holland & Hart LLP and Patrick J. Reilly and Nicole E. Lovelock, Las
Vegas,
for Petitioner Nevada Association Services, Inc.
Wolf, Rifkin, Shapiro, Schulman & Rabkin, LLP, and Michael J. Lemcool,
Don Springmeyer, and Gregory P. Kerr, Las Vegas,
for Petitioner Peccole Ranch Community Association.
Adams Law Group and James R. Adams, Las Vegas,
for Real Party in Interest Elsinore, LLC.
- 94-6
Johns & Durrant, LLP, and Lance W. Johns, Las Vegas,
for Real Party in Interest G.J.L., Incorporated.
BEFORE THE COURT EN BANC.'
OPINION
By the Court, SAITTA, J.:
"The voluntary payment doctrine is a long-standing doctrine of
law, which clearly provides that one who makes a payment voluntarily
cannot recover it on the ground that he was under no legal obligation to
make the payment." Best Buy Stores v. Benderson-Wainberg Assocs., 668
F.3d 1019, 1030 (8th Cir. 2012) (internal quotations omitted). This
doctrine precludes recovery of a voluntary payment unless the party can
demonstrate that it meets an exception to the doctrine.
At issue here is whether the voluntary payment doctrine
applies in Nevada to bar a property owner from recovering fees that it
paid to a community association and, if so, whether the property owner
demonstrated an exception to this doctrine by showing that the payments
were made under business compulsion or in defense of property. We hold
that the doctrine is valid in Nevada and that the property owner did not
show an exception which would preclude its application in the present
case.
'The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Chief Justice, voluntarily recused
himself from participation in the decision of this matter.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A