Case Name: BUDGET FINANCIAL CORPORATION and FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY (Formerly NEVADA TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY), Appellants, v. SYSTEM INVESTMENT CORPORATION (Formerly GROUSE CREEK RANCHES), and PACIFIC WESTATES CORPORATION, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Nevada
Jurisdiction: Nevada
Decision Date: 1973-07-10
Citations: 89 Nev. 306
Docket Number: No. 6983
Parties: BUDGET FINANCIAL CORPORATION and FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY (Formerly NEVADA TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY), Appellants, v. SYSTEM INVESTMENT CORPORATION (Formerly GROUSE CREEK RANCHES), and PACIFIC WESTATES CORPORATION, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Nevada Reports
Volume: 89
Pages: 306–307

Head Matter:
BUDGET FINANCIAL CORPORATION and FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY (Formerly NEVADA TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY), Appellants, v. SYSTEM INVESTMENT CORPORATION (Formerly GROUSE CREEK RANCHES), and PACIFIC WESTATES CORPORATION, Respondents.
No. 6983
July 10, 1973
511 P.2d 1047
McCune and Associates, Paul J. Williams, and Virgil D. Dutt, of Reno, for Appellants.
Wilson and Wilson, of Elko, and Keith Williams, of Santa Ana, California, for Respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION
Per Curiam:
On an earlier appeal, we determined the respective lien priorities of Budget Financial Corporation and Grouse Creek Ranches in property of Pacific Westates Corporation, and remanded the case for an accounting and distribution of the .debtor's property in accordance with the lien priorities thus determined. Grouse Cr. Ranches v. Budget Financial Corp., 87 Nev. 419, 488 P.2d 917 (1971). After remittitur, the instant appellants moved the trial court to proceed contrary to our instructions, contending for the first time that Nevada's attachment-garnishment procedures are unconstitutional. From the trial court's order denying appellants' request, a purported second appeal has been taken.
As to all matters encompassed by the judgment concerned in the first appeal, the action was terminated when remittitur was issued. Cowgill v. Dodd, 87 Nev. 401, 488 P.2d 353 (1971); Misty Management v. District Ct., 83 Nev. 180, 426 P.2d 728 (1967). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. The trial court will proceed in accord with our prior opinion.