IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

ALBERT D. MASSI, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

DONALD NOBIS; AND MARY NOBIS, 

Respondents. 

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE 

No. 66001 

FILED 

FEB 2 6 2016 

TRADE K. UNDEMAN 

CLERK F -UPREPvIE COURT 

BY . 

DEPUTY CLERK 

This is an appeal from a post-judgment district court order 

denying a motion to enforce the parties' settlement agreement. Eighth 

Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jerome T. Tao, Judge. 

Prior to trial, appellant Albert Massi and respondents Donald 

and Mary Nobis engaged in settlement discussions. The proposed 

settlement agreement recommended that the Nobises tender three 

property interests to Massi, including an interest in a property known as 

Buffalo/215. Massi's attorney prepared a settlement agreement stating 

that the Nobises had a cost basis of $500,000 in the Buffalo/215 property. 

The Nobises did not sign the document. 

At a pretrial hearing, the parties informed the district court 

that a settlement had been reached. Massi's counsel then read his version 

of the settlement agreement to the court, which provided for a $500,000 

cost basis for the Buffalo/215 property. Massi also informed the court that 

he had the warranty deed for the Buffalo/215 property with a value 

declaration of $500,000. The Nobises' counsel later recited their version of 

the settlement agreement to the court, omitting any references to the cost 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A e 

“7-5(012 
basis. After Massi's counsel indicated that the Nobises' counsel's 

recitation of the settlement agreement was acceptable, the district court 

accepted that agreement pursuant to Eighth Judicial District Court Rule 

(EDCR) 7.50. 1 

It was later determined that the Nobises' basis in the property 

was actually only $250,000. Massi moved to enforce the settlement 

agreement to give full value to him, arguing that the Nobises 

misrepresented the cost basis for Buffalo/215. The district court denied 

the motion, finding that the agreement placed on the record and agreed to 

by the parties did not incorporate as a material term the $500,000 cost 

basis. 

'Eighth Judicial District Court Rule 7.50 provides that 

[n]o agreement or stipulation between the parties 

or their attorneys will be effective unless the same 

shall, by consent, be entered in the minutes in the 

form of an order, or unless the same is in writing 

subscribed by the party against whom the same 

shall be alleged, or by the party's attorney. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A (e, 
Massi argues on appeal that the district court erred in denying 

his motion to enforce the settlement agreement because the alleged 

$500,000 cost basis was a material term of the settlement agreement. 2We 

disagree. 3 

"Because a settlement agreement is a contract, its 

construction and enforcement are governed by principles of contract 

law . [, which] require . . . an offer and acceptance, meeting of the 

minds, and consideration." May v. Anderson, 121 Nev. 668, 672, 119 P.3d 

1254, 1257 (2005). "In the case of a settlement agreement, a court cannot 

compel compliance when material terms remain uncertain." Id. 

Moreover, "[a] district court can grant a party's motion to enforce a 

2Massi further alleges that the Nobises defrauded him by 

misrepresenting the cost basis. However, this issue was not properly 

before the district court and is not properly before us. If Massi had filed a 

complaint against the Nobises for fraud, the district court would consider 

the evidence and then decide whether to award damages; however, this is 

not the process used "on a mere motion to enforce a settlement 

agreement." Resnick v. Valente, 97 Nev. 615, 617, 637 R2d 1205, 1206 

(1981) ("[T]o allow motions [to enforce settlement agreements] to lead to 

judgment would result in trial by affidavit; and to enter judgment in 

summary proceedings on such a motion is" prohibited). 

3The Nobises argue that the district court did not have jurisdiction 

over Massi's post-judgment motion. Although this argument was not 

raised in the district court, "[a] court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction 

can be raised for the first time on appeal." Swan v. Swan, 106 Nev. 464, 

469, 796 P.2d 221, 224 (1990). We conclude that the district court had 

jurisdiction pursuant to Eighth Judicial District Court Rule 7.50 to 

determine the materials terms of the agreement entered on the record. 

See Grisham v. Grisham, 128 Nev., Adv, Op. 60, 289 P.3d 230, 233 (2012) 

("An agreement to settle pending litigation can be enforced by motion in 

the case being settled."). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 3 

(01 1947A 
Harde 

J. 

settlement agreement ... if the agreement is either reduced to a signed 

writing or entered in the court minutes in the form of an order, ... so long 

as the settlement agreement's material terms are certain." The Power Co. 

v. Henry, 130 Nev., Adv. Op. 21, 321 P.3d 858, 863 (2014) (citations 

omitted). This court defers to the district court's findings of the existence 

of a contract unless the findings are clearly erroneous or not based on 

substantial evidence. James Hardie Gypsum (Nev.) Inc. v. Inquipco, 112 

Nev. 1397, 1401, 929 P.2d 903, 906 (1996), disapproved of on other 

grounds by Sandy Valley Assocs. v. Sky Ranch Estates Owners Ass'n, 117 

Nev. 948, 955 n.6, 35 P.3d 964, 968 n.6 (2001). Finally, this court reviews 

contract interpretation de novo. May, 121 Nev. at 672, 119 P.3d at 1257. 

During the pretrial hearing, the district court confirmed the 

material terms of the settlement agreement, and the agreed-upon version 

was entered in the court minutes pursuant to EDCR 7.50. Based on the 

record before us, we conclude that the district court's finding that the 

$500,000 cost basis for the Buffalo/215 property was not a material term of 

the contract was not clearly erroneous. 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Saitta 

J. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 4 

(0) 1947A eo 
cc: Eighth Judicial District Court Dept. 20 

Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge 

Albert D. Massi, Ltd. 

Cap & Kudler 

Hutchison & Steffen, LLC 

Eighth Judicial District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 5 

(0) 1947A