AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the Plaintiff, Community 1st Bank Las Vegas, seeking enforcement of a court's judgment through post-judgment writs of replevin and assistance against Defendants, Christobal I. Gutierrez and Martina A. Gutierrez, who contested the inclusion of wheels and rims as part of the collateral in a security agreement. The Defendants argued that these items were not specifically described in the agreement and thus should not be considered part of the collateral. The security agreement included a clause covering "all accessions, attachments, accessories, tools, parts, supplies, replacements of and additions to any of the collateral described herein, whether added now or later."

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee: Argued that the post-judgment writs of replevin and assistance were necessary for the enforcement of the court's judgment and that the wheels and rims are considered part of the collateral as they are accessions to the vehicle and trailer identified in the security agreement.
• Defendants-Appellants: Contended that the district court erred in granting the Plaintiff’s proposed first amended petitions for post-judgment writs of replevin and assistance, argued against the necessity of a writ of assistance in an action for replevin, and claimed that the wheels and rims are not part of the vehicles listed as collateral in the security agreement because they were not specifically described.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in granting Plaintiff’s proposed first amended petitions for post-judgment writs of replevin and assistance.
• Whether the district court was required to have Plaintiff file a bond as laid out in the replevin statute.
• Whether Plaintiff is entitled to the post-judgment writs of replevin and assistance.
• Whether a writ of assistance is necessary in an action for replevin.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order granting Plaintiff’s first amended petition for post-judgment writ of replevin and post-judgment writ of assistance.

Reasons

• Per LINDA M. VANZI, J. (JENNIFER L. ATTREP, J., and BRIANA H. ZAMORA, J., concurring): The Court concluded that Defendants failed to demonstrate error by the district court on the issues raised. It was determined that the district court did not err in its decision as the post-judgment writ of replevin sought by the Plaintiff for enforcement of the court’s judgment was distinguishable from a new action for replevin, thus certain requirements in the replevin statute, such as filing an affidavit or seeking a bond, were treated differently. The Court also found that wheels and rims are considered accessions to the vehicle and trailer identified in the security agreement and thus part of the collateral. Defendants' arguments regarding the necessity of submitting an affidavit and bond for the writ of replevin and their entitlement to their property in "as-is" condition were not persuasive. The Court affirmed the district court's order based on these findings (paras 1-6).