Zhang v. Eighth Judicial District Court of State of Nevada

Summary

The Nevada Supreme Court considered whether a real property purchase agreement made after the seller repudiated an earlier agreement for a lower price was enforceable. The court held that the later agreement was unsupported by consideration under the preexisting duty rule and did not effect a novation. It issued a writ of mandamus directing the district court to reinstate the complaint and vacate the order expunging the notice of lis pendens.

Holdings

1. Extraordinary writ review was appropriate because an appeal after final judgment would be inadequate where the real property could be transferred before appellate review.
2. A seller's promise to perform an existing contractual duty is not consideration for a buyer's promise to pay more, so the February 3 agreement was unsupported by consideration and did not displace the February 1 agreement.
3. The February 3 agreement did not constitute a novation that replaced the February 1 agreement because the parties remained the same and the new agreement was itself subject to the preexisting-duty rule.
4. The district court manifestly abused its discretion by dismissing Zhang's complaint because the complaint alleged a viable claim based on the February 1 agreement.
5. The district court manifestly abused its discretion by expunging Zhang's notice of lis pendens because her complaint alleged viable claims concerning real property.

Questions Presented

1. Whether extraordinary writ review was appropriate despite the availability of a later appeal.
2. Whether the February 3 agreement, under which the seller demanded a higher price for performing his obligations under the February 1 agreement, was supported by consideration and replaced the original agreement through novation.
3. Whether the district court erred in dismissing Zhang's complaint under NRCP 12(b)(5).
4. Whether the district court erred in expunging Zhang's notice of lis pendens.
5. Whether Zhang's requests for a writ of prohibition concerning factual issues and mandamus compelling leave to amend remained justiciable after reinstatement of the complaint.

Disposition

writ_granted