Case ID: nev_90/html/0174-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam:\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DOUGLAS J. VENABLE, Appellant, v. MARY B. SANFORD, Respondent.
    No. 7298
    April 19, 1974
    520 P.2d 959
    
      Michael L. Hines, of Las Vegas, for Appellant.
    
      Douglas R. Pike, of Las Vegas, for Respondent.
   OPINION

Per Curiam:

Mary B. Sanford commenced this action in the district court to recover $7,050, which she claimed was due and owing her from appellant, Douglas J. Venable. The court, sitting without a jury, found in favor of Mary. Douglas has appealed, seeking reversal on the ground that the judgment was not supported by the record.

The sole issue presented is whether there is substantial evidence in the proceedings below to support the findings of the court. Sala & Ruthe Realty, Inc. v. Deneen, 89 Nev. 98, 507 P.2d 140 (1973). We have reviewed the record, and we find that such evidence does exist. Therefore, we affirm.