Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (19)
- Civil Law (16)
- Property Law and Real Estate (12)
- Civil Procedure (10)
- Administrative Law (8)
-
- Criminal Procedure (7)
- Constitutional Law (4)
- Family Law (4)
- Contracts (3)
- Labor and Employment Law (3)
- Privacy Law (3)
- State and Local Government Law (3)
- Torts (3)
- Evidence (2)
- Water Law (2)
- Business Organizations Law (1)
- Estates and Trusts (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Gaming Law (1)
- Insurance Law (1)
- Intellectual Property Law (1)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (1)
- Legislation (1)
- Other Law (1)
- Workers' Compensation Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (2)
- Civil Procedure (2)
- Statutory Interpretation (2)
- ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: ELECTION POWERS (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: ATTORNEY FEES (1)
-
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: CONCURRENT WAGES IN WORKERS' COMPENSATION CALCUATION (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: DUE PROCESS (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: HEARING OFFICER DECISIONS (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: JUDICIAL REVIEW (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: WORKERS’ COMPENSATION (1)
- ADMISSIBILITY OF PRIOR BAD ACTS (1)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Agents (1)
- Attorneys (1)
- Business (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: ANTITRUST (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: EMPLOYMENT (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: MOTION TO DISMISS (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: NEGLIGENCE (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: RELIEF UNDER NRCP 60(b)(1) (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: RISK ASSESSMENT (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR LEGAL MALPRACTICE (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: STAY ENFORCEMENT (1)
- CIVIL LAW: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE (1)
- CIVIL LAW: TIME LIMITS FOR NONJUDICIAL FORECLOSURE (1)
- CIVIL LAW: WRIT OF MANDAMUS (1)
- CIVIL PROCEDURE: ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS (1)
- CIVIL PROCEDURE: CONTRACTS (1)
- CIVIL PROCEDURE: MOTION TO DISMISS; CIVIL LAW: DEFAMATION (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 93
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Capanna, M.D. V. Orth, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 108 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Pengxiang Tian
Capanna, M.D. V. Orth, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 108 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Pengxiang Tian
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that Orth’s counsel violated the golden rule arguments, but opposing party’s substantial rights were not violated. Moreover, the district court’s ruling regarding plaintiff expert’s potential biases did not impose severe limitations on Capanna’s ability to fully cross-examine plaintiff’s expert. Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed Orth to supplement expert witness list and the award of attorney fees and costs was within the discretion of the district court. Lastly, Orth lacks standing in challenging the district court’s decision.
Harris V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 107 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Yilmaz Turkeri
Harris V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 107 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Yilmaz Turkeri
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered whether the admission of gruesome photographs showing the disfigured bodies of the victims following their deaths and the subsequent autopsies amounted to an abuse of the district court’s discretion. The Court concluded that admission of these photographs was an abuse of the district court’s discretion.
In Re: Estate Of Sarge 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 105 (Dec. 27, 2018), Kaila Patrick
In Re: Estate Of Sarge 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 105 (Dec. 27, 2018), Kaila Patrick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court overruled the consolidation rule established in Malin v. Farmers Insurance Exchange and held that a final order resolving a consolidated case is immediately appealable as a final judgment, even if the other constituent cases or other cases are still pending. Accordingly, the Court held that the appeal at issue may proceed because the challenged order finally resolved one of multiple consolidated cases.
Gonor V. Dale, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 109 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Esteban Hernandez
Gonor V. Dale, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 109 (Dec. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Esteban Hernandez
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found that the 90-day period in which a deceased party’s successor or representative must seek to substitute for the deceased plaintiff begins when a party files a suggestion of death on the record, not on the actual date of death. But, because appellants failed to identify the proper party to maintain the survival action within 90 days, the Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the suit with prejudice.
Cooper V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 104 (Dec. 27, 2018), Christi Dupont
Cooper V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 104 (Dec. 27, 2018), Christi Dupont
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that removing a potential juror on the basis of race is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause and held that the district court erred when it did not find a prima facie showing of race-based discrimination during the jury selection process.
Branch Banking & Tr. Co. V. Gerrard, Esq., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 106 (Dec. 27, 2018), Katrina Brandhagen
Branch Banking & Tr. Co. V. Gerrard, Esq., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 106 (Dec. 27, 2018), Katrina Brandhagen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
No abstract provided.
State V. Brown (Taren), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 102 (Dec. 20, 2018), Tracie Jefcik
State V. Brown (Taren), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 102 (Dec. 20, 2018), Tracie Jefcik
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court interpreted the good cause showing requirements in NRS 177.015(2) and defined two of the statute’s key phrases: (1) the phrase “propriety of the appeal” means that an appeal is not taken for the purpose of delay, and (2) the phrase “miscarriage of justice” means that suppression of evidence would significantly impair or terminate the State’s ability to prosecute the case. Finding that the State in this case failed to demonstrate good cause, the Court dismissed the appeal.
Century Surety Co. V. Andrew, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 100 (Dec. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Austin Maul
Century Surety Co. V. Andrew, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 100 (Dec. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Austin Maul
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that when an insurer breaches its contractual duty to defend the insured, the insurer’s liability is not capped at the policy limits plus the insured’s defense costs; an insurer may be liable for any consequential damages caused by its breach. Moreover, whether the insurer acted in good-faith is irrelevant for determining the damages for a breach of this duty.
Flores V. Las Vegas-Clark Cty. Library Dist., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 101 (Dec. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Paige Hall
Flores V. Las Vegas-Clark Cty. Library Dist., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 101 (Dec. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Paige Hall
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) NRS §§ 244.364, 268.418, and 269.222, as amended by Senate Bill 175 (“SB 175”), unambiguously preempt firearm ordinances and regulations adopted by counties, cities, and towns only and (2) a library district created in accordance with NRS Chapter 379 is not a “county,” “city,” or “town” for the purposes of SB 175.
Rodriguez (Juan) V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Jessica Story
Rodriguez (Juan) V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Jessica Story
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that NRS 200.481(2)(b) is not an enhancement statute and so a sentence for battery resulting in substantial bodily harm with a consecutive sentence for the older-person enhancement is not double sentencing.
N. Lake Tahoe Protection Dist. V. Bd. Of Admin., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 93 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Hannah Nelson
N. Lake Tahoe Protection Dist. V. Bd. Of Admin., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 93 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Hannah Nelson
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that NRS 616B.578(4) does not require an employer to know the precise medical terminology for an employee’s permanent physical impairment before the subsequent injury. However, the statute requires that an employee’s preexisting permanent physical impairment be fairly and reasonably observed from a written record and the impairment must amount to at least 6% whole person impairment.
State V. Dist. Ct. (Ojeda (Francisco)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 94 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Myrra Dvorak
State V. Dist. Ct. (Ojeda (Francisco)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 94 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Myrra Dvorak
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court focused on the issue of whether a district court can grant a motion to compel disclosure of criminal background information of veniremembers gathered by the prosecution. The Court determined that a district court has the authority to order the prosecution to share criminal background information of veniremembers obtained from databases that the defense cannot access.
O’Keefe V. State Of Nev. Dep’T Of Motor Vehicles, Nev. Adv. Op. 92 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Jacqueline Cope
O’Keefe V. State Of Nev. Dep’T Of Motor Vehicles, Nev. Adv. Op. 92 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Jacqueline Cope
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court reviewed de novo whether a classified employee violated a law or regulation when she challenged a challenges a state agency’s decision to terminate. Moreover, the Court applied a deferential standard of reasonableness to the agency’s decision to terminate the employee in service of the public good.
State V. Second Judicial Dist. Court. (Hearn (Matthew)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 96 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Taylor Buono
State V. Second Judicial Dist. Court. (Hearn (Matthew)), 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 96 (Dec. 6, 2018) (En Banc), Taylor Buono
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court affirmed the district court’s decision and held that the prosecutorial consent provision in NRS 176A.290 violated the Nevada Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine. Furthermore, the Court struck the offending language, finding that the provision could be severed from the statute without impacting the legislature’s intent.
Mcgowen V. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 89 (Nov. 21, 2018) (En Banc), Darcy Bower
Mcgowen V. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 89 (Nov. 21, 2018) (En Banc), Darcy Bower
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that Nevada caselaw and NRCP 4(c) give conflicting opinions on whether an attorney or their employee can serve someone for their client. Moreover, the Court clarified that the purpose of the 2004 amendment to NRCP 4(c) was to mirror FRCP 4(c)(2) to interpret the exclusion of counsel as a “party.”
Patin V. Lee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Nov. 15, 2018) (En Banc), Haley Jaramillo
Patin V. Lee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Nov. 15, 2018) (En Banc), Haley Jaramillo
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that a statement by an attorney on her firm’s website summarizing a jury’s verdict is not a statement in direct connection with an issue under consideration by a judicial body. The Court explained that because the statement is not a “good faith communication in furtherance of the right . . . to free speech in direct connection with an issue of public concern,” it would not receive anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) protection under NRS § 41.660(1).
State V. Plunkett, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 88 (Nov. 15, 2018) (En Banc), Austin Maul
State V. Plunkett, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 88 (Nov. 15, 2018) (En Banc), Austin Maul
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that NRS 212.165(4) imposes criminal liability on nonprisoners who assist prisoners in jail possessing cellphones.
State Of Nev. Local Gov’T Emp. Mgmt. Bd., V. Educ. Support Emp. Ass’N, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 86 (Nov. 8, 2018), Amanda Netuschil
State Of Nev. Local Gov’T Emp. Mgmt. Bd., V. Educ. Support Emp. Ass’N, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 86 (Nov. 8, 2018), Amanda Netuschil
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the plain language application of NRS § 288.160 and Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 288.110 states that the vote-counting standard is to be determined by the majority of members of the bargaining unit and not by a majority of the votes cast.
Sarfo V. State Bd. Of Medical Examiners, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Nov. 1, 2018), Nathaniel Saxe
Sarfo V. State Bd. Of Medical Examiners, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Nov. 1, 2018), Nathaniel Saxe
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that when a complaint is filed with the Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners against a physician, the physician’s due process rights do not attach to the fact-finding role of the administrative agency.
Williams V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Oct. 25, 2018), Arthur Burn
Williams V. State, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Oct. 25, 2018), Arthur Burn
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) a district court must perform a comprehensive three-step analysis when a defendant challenges the use of race in peremptory strikes and that (2) a district court should hold a hearing when a defendant seeks to admit evidence showing that a minor victim could have contrived sexual abuse allegations.
Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Las Vegas Review Journal, Nev. Adv. Op. 84 (Oct. 25, 2018) (En Banc), Edgar Cervantes
Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Las Vegas Review Journal, Nev. Adv. Op. 84 (Oct. 25, 2018) (En Banc), Edgar Cervantes
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the interest of individuals who participate in an internal investigation by a state agency regarding the inappropriate behavior of an elected official should be considered before publishing their identity or identifying information on public records. The Court adopted the Cameranesi test to determine the scope of redactions of names of persons identified in an investigative report with nontrivial privacy claims.
Pub. Emps.’ Ret. Sys. Of Nev., A Pub. Agency V. Nev. Pol’Y Res. Inst. Inc., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Oct. 18, 2018) (En Banc), Daniel Brady
Pub. Emps.’ Ret. Sys. Of Nev., A Pub. Agency V. Nev. Pol’Y Res. Inst. Inc., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Oct. 18, 2018) (En Banc), Daniel Brady
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the Nevada Public Records Act requires the government agency to disclose the requested information if: (1) it can be found by searching a database for existing information, (2) it is readily accessible and not confidential, and (3) the alleged risks of disclosure do not outweigh the benefits of the public’s interest in the records.
Mulkern V. Eight Jud. Dist. Ct., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 82 (Oct. 18, 2018), Adrianna Guida
Mulkern V. Eight Jud. Dist. Ct., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 82 (Oct. 18, 2018), Adrianna Guida
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined the presumption under NRS § 432B.550(5)(a), that a child’s best interest is to be placed together with the siblings of the child, also applies to adopted children. Further, the Court held adoption does not sever a biological sibling relationship for purposes of NRS § 432B.550(5)(a).
Dolorfino V. Univ. Med. Ctr. Of S. Nev., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Oct. 4, 2018), Steven Brecher
Dolorfino V. Univ. Med. Ctr. Of S. Nev., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Oct. 4, 2018), Steven Brecher
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that a claim of injury suffered during medical treatment may not be dismissed for lack of a supporting affidavit from a medical expert if the injured body part is not “directly involved in” or “proximate” to the treatment, where those phrases are to be interpreted quite narrowly.
Howard V. Hughes, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Oct. 4, 2018), Christian Ogata
Howard V. Hughes, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Oct. 4, 2018), Christian Ogata
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court clarified the holding of Langevin v. York, and applied the presumptions outlined in Sack v. Tomlin to unmarried joint tenants. The Court held that before property may be partitioned and shares are proportionally divided between unrelated joint tenants, a party must overcome the presumption of equal ownership. If a party overcomes this presumption, the shares are proportionally divided based on the parties’ respective financial contributions to the initial purchase price, unless the other party can show a donative intent to gift an equal ownership interest.
Rodriguez V. Fiesta Palms Llc, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 78 (Oct. 4, 2018), Khaylia Decaires
Rodriguez V. Fiesta Palms Llc, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 78 (Oct. 4, 2018), Khaylia Decaires
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that relief under NRCP 60(b)(1) is appropriate when litigants: (1) promptly apply to remove judgement, (2) not intend to delay proceedings, (3) lack knowledge of procedural requirements; and (4) act in good faith. Further, the Court concluded that a district court must consider the relevant facts, including the difficulties faced by pro se litigants, when determining to grant or deny NRCP 60(b)(1) relief.
Valley Health Sys. V. Estate Of Jane Doe, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (Sept. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Amanda Stafford
Valley Health Sys. V. Estate Of Jane Doe, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (Sept. 27, 2018) (En Banc), Amanda Stafford
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that the district court acted within its discretion in sanctioning the party for discovery violations. Further, it determined that the district court’s citation to the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct causes reputational harm that amounts to a sanction and that the district court correctly found that the attorneys did in fact violate Nevada Rule of Professional Conduct 3.3(a)(1).
Warren, Jr. (Joseph) V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Sep. 27, 2018) (En Banc), James Puccinelli
Warren, Jr. (Joseph) V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Sep. 27, 2018) (En Banc), James Puccinelli
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that NRS § 177.015(1)(a) authorizes the State to appeal from a justice court dismissal of a criminal complaint because such a decision is a final judgment, and that NRS § 178.562(2) does not limit the State’s remedies to appeal a justice court’s decision to dismiss a criminal complaint because this provision does not mention final judgment.
Wells Fargo, N.A. V. Radecki, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 74 (Sep. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Yilmaz Turkeri
Wells Fargo, N.A. V. Radecki, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 74 (Sep. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Yilmaz Turkeri
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that: (1) Wells Fargo failed to present evidence of unfairness or irregularity that would invalidate the foreclosure sale; (2) pursuant to NRS 112.170(2), a regularly conducted, noncollusive foreclosure sale under NRS Chapter 116 is exempt under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA); and (3) inaccuracies in a foreclosure deed are not sufficient to invalidate a foreclosure sale that complied with NRS Chapter 116.
Bank Of America, N.A. V. Sfr Inv.’S Pool 1, Llc, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Sept. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Esteban Hernandez
Bank Of America, N.A. V. Sfr Inv.’S Pool 1, Llc, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Sept. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Esteban Hernandez
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that becausethe holder of the first deed of trust provided valid tender of the superpriority portion of anHOA’s lien, the HOA’s foreclosure on the lien was void as to the superpriority portion. Further, anHOA has no right to convey full title to the property because the holder’s first deed of trust remains after foreclosure. Thus,when the holder unconditionally tenders the superiority amount due, the buyer at an HOA lien foreclosure sale takes the property subject to the deed of trust.