Opinion ID: 1136438
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: effect of the city's order

Text: Kate attacked the validity of the city's order on several grounds, which we need not recite nor consider on this appeal, because under the facts presented Kate may not challenge the order. As the district judge ruled in his decision: Plaintiffs [the Dodds] are not in a position now to question the order of the City since the City is not a party to this action. The report and order of the City was final. In Goldring v. Kline, 71 Nev. 181, 189, 284 P.2d 374, 378 (1955), this court held: Lessees contend that, considering the repairability of the building, the city should not have ordered demolition. If the city's safety order was for any reason improper, it can hardly be challenged in an action to which the city is not a party. See also Ripps v. City of Las Vegas, 72 Nev. 135, 297 P.2d 258 (1956); Maryland Cas. Co. v. Frank, 85 Nev. 209, 452 P.2d 919 (1969).