Webb v. Shull
128 Nev. 85
Nev.2012Background
- Webb purchased a home from Celebrate Properties, LLC, which was managed by Harry Shull among others.
- Soil-related construction defects existed; prior buyers had discovered and disclosed defects and the home had been repurchased from them.
- Celebrate bought the home back from the initial purchasers; financing for repurchase was limited, and Shull bought the home in his own name before selling to Celebrate for one dollar, with Shull’s mortgage remained.
- Defects were not disclosed to Webb, in violation of disclosure statutes, and soil problems were discovered after Webb’s purchase.
- Webb sued for various claims including NRS 113.150(4) treble damages for nondisclosure; the district court awarded treble damages to Webb against Celebrate but did not hold Shull liable as Celebrate’s alter ego.
- The district court denied alter ego liability due to unexplained reasoning; this Court vacates that portion and remands for findings on whether Shull was Celebrate’s alter ego.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| NRS 113.150(4) mental state requirement | Webb: treble damages awarded without require[ment] of willfulness | Celebrate: require willfulness or heightened mental culpability | No mental culpability element required; statutory damages are remedial |
| Alter ego liability under NRS 78.747 | Shull was alter ego of Celebrate; should pierce corporate veil | District court found no alter ego; record insufficient | Remanded for explicit, supported findings on alter ego issue |
| Character of treble damages under NRS 113.150(4) | Treble damages are recoverable where undisclosed defect existed with knowledge | Treble damages punitive, requiring heightened proof | Treble damages are remedial, not per se punitive; no heightened mental state required |
Key Cases Cited
- Dean v. United States, 556 U.S. 568 (U.S. 2009) (no implicit intent requirement in statute absent express language)
- Cook County v. United States ex rel. Chandler, 538 U.S. 119 (U.S. 2003) (treble damages with remedial/punitive considerations discussed)
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, 473 U.S. 614 (U.S. 1985) (treble damages often have remedial aspects; context matters)
- Southern Nev. Homebuilders v. Clark County, 121 Nev. 446, 117 P.3d 171 (Nev. 2005) (statutory interpretation consistent with overall scheme; avoid absurd results)
- Lorenz v. Beltio, Ltd., 114 Nev. 795, 963 P.2d 488 (Nev. 1998) (review of alter ego determinations; substantial evidence standard)
- Barth v. Canyon County, 918 P.2d 576 (Idaho 1996) (treble damages nature and punitive vs. remedial analysis)