Court Opinion

ID: 9787729
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 00:23:17.092655+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:51.965619
License: Public Domain

Saitta, J.,
dissenting:
I disagree with the majority on two points. First, Skender v. Brunsonbuilt Construction & Development Co., 122 Nev. 1430, 148 P.3d 710 (2006), should be mandatory in all civil cases, not just preferred, as the majority suggests. Second, the majority’s holding regarding Skender should be prospective, not retroactive. There was no indication at the time of trial that this court would extend Skender beyond constructional defect cases with comparative negligence de*328fenses. Therefore, I would affirm the jury verdict in this case and hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to submit Allstate’s special interrogatories.