Stuart Twitchell v. Wendy Paris

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Stuart Twitchell appeals the district court’s judgment after a bench trial in favor of Defendants Wendy Paris et al. on Twitchell’s claims to recover a real estate commission under breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment theories and on Defendants’ counterclaims for a declaration that two clauses of the contract were unconscionable and for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and negligence per se/violation of statutes and administrative regulations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the district court’s judgment on Twitchell’s claims but reverse the judgment on the counterclaims.

The district court found that Twitc-hell was not the procuring cause of the sale because he abandoned efforts by failing to become involved in the sale negotiations, to contact the buyers for about two years before the sale, or actively to pursue other potential buyers. This is a finding of ultimate fact, and it is not clearly erroneous. See Atwell v. Sw. Sec., 107 Nev. 820 , 820 P.2d 766, 770 (1991) (per curiam).…