overrule an exercise of discretion below when the rules governing the
vacation of a default have not been met").
Appellant also contends that the district court's damages
award was not based upon a reasonable methodology and was instead
based upon speculation. See Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Hyatt, 130 Nev.
Adv. Op. No. 71, 335 P.3d 125, 156 (2014) ("Damages cannot be based
solely upon possibilities and speculative testimony." (internal quotation
omitted)). Specifically, appellant contends that respondent Monsoon
Pacific had an exclusive distributorship for only shisham wood products
manufactured by appellant, but that the district court based its damages
award on all of the products manufactured by appellant. Having
considered this contention, we agree that the methodology used by the
district court to compute damages is inconsistent with the district court's
finding regarding the scope of the parties' distributorship agreement. 2
Consequently, we are unable to affirm the damages award. See id.
Consistent with the foregoing, we affirm the appealed
judgment insofar as the district court declined to set aside the entry of
default and determined that respondents were entitled to a default
judgment. We vacate the damages award, however, and remand this
matter to the district court so that it may render an award that is
2 In particular, the district court found that the parties' agreement
provided Monsoon Pacific with exclusive distributorship rights for "all
Shekhawati shisham wooden furniture." Respondents have not addressed
appellant's argument regarding this finding and the finding's effect on the
damages calculation, and it is otherwise unclear from the record whether
this was the district court's intended finding regarding the scope of the
parties' agreement.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1907A 91090
consistent with the district court's determination regarding the scope of
the parties' agreement. 3 Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED IN
PART AND VACATED IN PART AND REMAND this matter to the
district court for proceedings consistent with this order.
J.
Parragui
J.
cc: Hon. Jerome Polaha, District Judge
Law Offices of John P. Springgate
Robison Belaustegui Sharp & Low
Michael J. Morrison
Washoe District Court Clerk
3 Inlight of this disposition, we need not address appellant's
additional arguments regarding the purported inaccuracies in the district
court's damages calculation.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A e