March 24, 2026, Oral Arguments
Myricks vs. Shields (Civil)
Las Vegas – 1:30 p.m. – Court of Appeals
Cronin vs. Wesley-Cronin (Civil)
Las Vegas – 2:15 p.m. – Court of Appeals
Myricks vs. Shields (Civil)
Docket No. 89588--COA
Las Vegas – 1:30 p.m. – Court of Appeals
This is an appeal and cross-appeal from a district court judgment entered after a bench trial in a contract and real-property dispute. The dispute arose from a series of loan agreements executed to finance a music venture, as well as from the parties’ joint ownership of residential property acquired during their dealings. The district court found that appellant/cross-respondent breached the parties’ agreements and entered judgment in favor of respondent/cross-appellant for the unpaid debt and accrued interest, rejecting appellant/cross-respondent’s reliance on the impossibility doctrine to excuse repayment based on the COVID-19 pandemic. The court also denied partition, found that respondent/cross-appellant had not contributed to the purchase or maintenance of the property, and ordered her to quitclaim her interest to appellant/cross-respondent. The issues on appeal and cross-appeal include whether the district court properly enforced the parties’ loan agreements and rejected appellant/cross-respondent’s impossibility defense, and whether the court erred in denying respondent/cross-appellant’s request for partition and requiring her to relinquish her ownership interest in the property when her name was still on the mortgage.
Cronin vs. Wesley-Cronin (Civil)
Docket No. 88887-COA
Las Vegas – 2:15 p.m. – Court of Appeals
This is an appeal from a district court judgment in a real property dispute. Appellant claims he was the sole owner of a defunct corporation that held title to the subject property and that the property was improperly transferred from the corporation to the seller, who then invalidly sold it to respondent purchaser. The district court quieted title to the property in favor of respondent purchaser, concluding he was a bona fide purchaser for value who had no notice of appellant’s alleged competing claim. The main issue on appeal is whether the sale of the property to respondent purchaser was valid even though the seller obtained the property through a transaction with the defunct corporation, or whether, as appellant maintains, the sale of the property was invalid and should be set aside.