The Court determined the lower court was correct in granting an ex-husband’s motion for summary judgment and quiet title. There was no genuine issue of material fact, however the Court held that the ex-husband was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. The Court concluded that the holding of Davidson v. Davidson did not apply to this case; thus, there was no statute of limitation issue, the divorce decree in controversy did not require renewal, and the initial action was barred by claim preclusion.
Mateo, Alexandra, "Kuptz-Blinkinsop v. Blinkinsop, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 40 (Jul. 9, 2020)" (2020). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1530.