Tuesday, April 12, 2016, Oral Arguments – Court of Appeals

Padilla Construction Company of Nevada vs. Burley
Docket Number: 65854
Carson City - 2:00 p.m. - Gibbons/Tao/Silver

Reno homeowners, who purchased homes in a new development in Arrowcreek, brought action against the general contractor for negligent construction and defects in their homes. The general contractor brought third-party claim against each of its subcontractors. One month prior to trial, the homeowners settled with the general contractor and all of the subcontractors, except with Padilla, the stucco subcontractor. Pursuant to the settlement, the general contractor assigned its indemnification rights to the homeowners and the general contractor’s insurer, which paid its policy limit to the homeowners in exchange for a full release of all claims against the general contractor, and assigned its subrogation rights to the homeowners. The homeowners then proceeded to trial against the stucco subcontractor. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the homeowners. The stucco contractor appeals.


(1) Did the district court abuse its discretion by allowing respondents to file a sixth amended complaint including subrogation claims? (2) Did respondents have standing to assert indemnity and subrogation claims as assignees? (3) Did the district court properly deny appellant's motion for directed verdict? and (4) Did the district court provide the proper verdict form?


This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Court of Appeals. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties.