Telerent Leasing Corporation filed a complaint against George Harmon d/b/a Valley Inn Motel. Thereafter, on March 1, 1976, the district court granted Telerent's motion for summary judgment and Harmon has appealed.
In his answer to the complaint, Harmon advanced, inter alia, the affirmative defense that under NRS 80.210(1), Telerent could not maintain the action because it was not qualified to do business in the state.
A motion for summary judgment should not be granted unless there is no genuine issue as to any material fact in the case. See Ottenheimer v. Real Estate Division, 91 Nev. 338, 535 P.2d 1284 (1975); Old West Enterprises v. Reno Escrow Co., 86 Nev. 727, 476 P.2d 1 (1970); Islandia, Inc. v. Marechek, 82 Nev. 424, 420 P.2d 5 (1966).
Here, when the trial judge ruled in favor of Telerent, there was nothing in the record to controvert Harmon's contention; therefore, there is an unresolved factual dispute regarding Telerent's compliance — or non-compliance — with the requirements of NRS 80.210(1).