Case Name: SHIRLEY ELKINS and NORVAL ELKINS, dba SH-VAL DRAPERIES & CARPET, Appellants, v. DONALD HARTLE and CHERYL HARTLE, Husband and Wife, Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Nevada
Jurisdiction: Nevada
Decision Date: 1976-06-30
Citations: 92 Nev. 416
Docket Number: No. 8403
Parties: SHIRLEY ELKINS and NORVAL ELKINS, dba SH-VAL DRAPERIES & CARPET, Appellants, v. DONALD HARTLE and CHERYL HARTLE, Husband and Wife, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Nevada Reports
Volume: 92
Pages: 416–417

Head Matter:
SHIRLEY ELKINS and NORVAL ELKINS, dba SH-VAL DRAPERIES & CARPET, Appellants, v. DONALD HARTLE and CHERYL HARTLE, Husband and Wife, Respondents.
No. 8403
June 30, 1976
551 P.2d 424
James L. Buchanan, II, Las Vegas, for Appellants.
Jones, Jones, Bell, LeBaron & Close, and Michael E. Buckley, Las Vegas, for Respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION
Per Curiam:
In this appeal, Norval and Shirley Elkins, doing business as Sh-Val Draperies & Carpet, contend that the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of respondents. We agree.
The complaint filed in the trial court contended that a contract existed for the design and installation of custom made draperies and that all workmanship and installation was guaranteed for two (2) years.
The affidavit in support of the motion for summary judgment, executed by respondents' attorney, affirmatively shows that he had no "personal knowledge" of any defects in either workmanship or installation. Absent such "verification" and "evidence", the granting of summary judgment was improper. NRCP 56(e); Daugherty v. Wabash Life Ins. Co., 87 Nev. 32, 482 P.2d 814 (1971).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.