Before Justices Douglas, Hardesty, and Parraguirre. Opinion by Justice Hardesty.
In this appeal and cross-appeal, the Court addressed whether proof of a mental state was necessary for an award of treble damages under NRS 113.150, which requires sellers of property to disclose known defects. Based on the plain language of NRS 113.150, the Court held that an award of treble damages under that statute was remedial, not punitive, and did not require any evidence of intent or other heightened mental state. The Court also considered a challenge to the district court’s determination regarding alter ego liability of one of the respondent; however, stating that the district court’s record was unclear and the district court made factual findings at odds with its denial of liability, the Court reversed and remanded for the district court to make factual findings and conclusions of law regarding alter ego liability. Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. (Kerry S. Doyle, Associate in the Reno office of McDonald Carano Wilson.)
