May 12, 2026, Oral Arguments
Abraxas Petroleum Corp. vs. Watson (Civil) c/w 90117
Carson City – 11:00 a.m. – Panel A26
Midtown 44 vs. Lorton (Civil)
Carson City – 1:00 p.m. – Panel A26
Abraxas Petroleum Corp. vs. Watson (Civil) c/w 90117
Docket No. 89642
Carson City – 11:00 a.m. – Panel A26
This is a consolidated appeal from two district court orders addressing respondent Robert L.G. Watson’s attempt to dissent from the short-form merger of appellant Abraxas Petroleum Corporation and its parent corporation. One order granted partial summary judgment for Watson, a minority stockholder owning both record shares and beneficial shares in Abraxas, after finding that Abraxas violated Watson’s dissenter’s rights under NRS 92A.460, and the other order awarded Watson attorney fees under NRS 92A.500(5). The appeal addresses whether (1) Watson’s failure to properly exercise his dissenter’s rights as to his beneficial shares precludes him from dissenting as to his record shares, and (2) NRS 92A.500(5)’s authorization of recovery for “all expenses of the suit” includes attorney fees.
Midtown 44 vs. Lorton (Civil)
Docket No. 90281
Carson City – 1:00 p.m. – Panel A26
Appellants Midtown 44 and The Pepper Group Nevada challenge the district court’s determination that respondent George E. Lorton obtained a comprehensive easement over a portion of their property. Appellants argue that the district court erred when it (1) violated the statute of frauds by determining respondent had an easement based on use of an intended but imperfectly created servitude for more than twenty-seven years; (2) improperly admitted and considered parol evidence and hearsay statements; (3) did not base its judgment on clear and convincing evidence; and (4) granted a comprehensive prescriptive easement, which is only available in extraordinary circumstances.