Digital Commons Network^™

Kosor, Jr. V. Olympia Co.’S Llc, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Dec. 31, 2020), Jorge "Coco" Padilla

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case focuses on Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statutes’ public forum component as it relates to defamation. Michael Kosor, a homeowner in the Southern Highlands community, criticized the developer/managers of the community, Olympia Companies, LLC and its president, Garry V. Goett, during homeowner association board meetings, in written materials distributed to the community, and online. Olympia sued Kosor for defamation, which Kosor unsuccessfully moved to dismiss under Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute in the district court. This Court concluded that Kosor met his burden to prove that all his statements were made in a public forum on an issue of public interest pursuant to …

Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Dep’T V. Las Vegas Review-Journal, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 86 (December 31, 2020), Jessica Phipps

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In an opinion drafted by Justice Stiglich, the Nevada Supreme Court considered the scope of its recent opinion in Clark County School District (CCSD) and whether that scope applies to more than investigative reports. The Court ruled that courts should apply the test adopted in CCSD when the government asserts any nontrivial privacy interest. The Court reversed and remanded the case for consideration as to whether disclosure of a unit assignment is likely to advance a significant public interest under CCSD and for the district court to balance that interest against the government’s nontrivial privacy interest.

In Re: Estate Of Scheide, Jr., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 84 (Dec. 31, 2020), Holly Parr

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

After a father died, his will went missing. His son believed that his father’s estate should go to him, while St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital believed that the estate should go to it. The father executed a will in June, leaving his estate to St. Jude. Then in October, the father executed a new will, with the only change from the June will being a change in the executor. After the father died, the October will went missing. However, an accurate copy of the October will existed. St. Jude attempted to probate the missing October will by presenting the copy …

Saticoy Bay Llc Series 133 Mclaren V. Green Tree Servicing Llc, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Dec. 31, 2020), Cristina Phipps

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A tender of nine months of past due assessments extinguishes the superpriority portion of an HOA’s lien such that an entity takes a property subject to the owner’s deed of trust.

Kaur V. Singh, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 77 (Dec. 10, 2020), Allison Mann

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court clarified that district courts should determine whether judicial estoppel applies to a situation, using the judicial estoppel factors, before considering whether a party sufficiently raised a defense to the application of the doctrine.

In Re: Christian Family Trust, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 73 (Dec. 3, 2020), Nina Hebibovich

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined whether a creditor of a settlor can satisfy its claim against the settlor’s trust in situations where the trustees approve the payment, but the trust does not expressly provide for payment of the claim. When the settlor’s interest in the trust is not exclusively discretionary, and there is not a profligate provision precluding payment of the claim, the Court held that a creditor may bring a claim against a settlor of a trust. In instances of a trust granting broad discretion to its trustees, the trustees may approve a creditor’s claim against the trust. In this matter, …

State, Dep't Of Transp. V. Bronder, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (December 3, 2020), Alina Krauff

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court considered whether NAC 281.305(1)(a) is a procedural rule within the rulemaking authority that NRS 281.641(5) gives the Nevada Department of Administration's Personnel Commission, or instead a jurisdictional rule that exceeds the Personnel Commission's authority and thus invalid. The Court concluded that NAC 281.305(1)(a) is a jurisdictional rule and is invalid.

Silverwing Dev. V. Nev. State Contractors Bd., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 74 (Dec. 3, 2020), Yoosun Jun

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Nevada State Contractors Board filed a complaint against Silverwing Development’s multiple contracts entered for a project claiming the total contracted amount for the project exceeded Silverwing’s monetary license limit in violation of NRS 624.220(2). NRS 624.220(2) limits the monetary license amount a contractor can bid on “one or more construction contracts on a single construction site or subdivision site for a single client.” The Board fined Silverwing $1,000 per violation, and Silverwing petitioned for judicial review. The district court denied Silverwing’s petition, and Silverwing appealed. Silverwing argued the term “subdivision site” in the statute is not unconstitutionally vague. The Board …

In Re Petition Of Aragon, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (Dec. 3, 2020), Victor Kang

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court found that a gross misdemeanor open or gross lewdness is not an offense for which a criminal record cannot be sealed. Thus, the district court abused its discretion when it denied appellant Aragon’s petition to seal his record regarding that offense.

Banka (Jack) V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Dec. 10, 2020), Joshua Nelson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A criminal defendant who enters a plea is entitled to know about the consequences of his plea, in particular, the range of the fine which must be assessed against him. The standard for this disclosure is high: in the case of a fine, the existence of the fine must be disclosed, as well as the maximum and minimum amounts.

Lathigee V. British Columbia Securities Commission, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 79 (Dec. 10, 2020), Michael Mcgrady

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In an opinion drafted by Justice Pickering, the Nevada Supreme Court considered whether the disgorgement portion of a securities-fraud judgment from British Columbia could be enforced in Nevada. The Court concluded that disgorgement judgments that serve as restitution do not constitute a penalty or fine under NRS 17.740(2)(b), and that the Canadian judgment was properly recognized by the district court under principles of comity.

Randolph V. State, 136 Nev. Ad. Op. 78 (Dec. 10, 2020), Alexandra Mateo

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court determined the district court abused its discretion in admitting the details of the appellant’s second wife’s death as evidence for his murder trial. Nevada law states that evidence of other bad acts is inadmissible unless the evidence is offered to prove something other than criminal propensity. Additionally, the Court held that the State did not meet its burden of proof showing the error was harmless. The Court reversed and remanded the judgment of conviction.

Walker V. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Dec. 10, 2020), Luis Montanez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether to grant petitioners’ request for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court to strike opposing counsel’s petition for a trial de novo in an arbitration dispute. The Court held that petitioners had not met the requirements for a writ of mandamus petition and therefore denied petitioners’ request.

Wynn V. The Associated Press, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 70 (Oct. 29, 2020), Samantha Goett

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court reversed a district court order dismissing former casino mogul Steve Wynn’s defamation complaint against The Associated Press based on a published article reporting on two 2018 citizens’ complaints to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department in which the complaint alleged that Wynn sexually assaulted a woman. The Court concluded that the trial judge, District Judge Ronald Israel, erred in dismissing The Associated Press from the case on fair report privilege grounds.

The State Of Nevada, Department Of Taxation V. The Eighth Judicial District Court Of The State Of Nevada, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (July 9, 2020), Luis Montanez

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court considered whether under NRCP 16.1 a government entity has “possession, custody, or control” over the cellphone data of former workers hired through a temporary employment agency. The Court held that a party has “possession, custody, or control” of such information if the party has either actual possession of the data or the legal right to obtain the data.

Moore V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Oct. 29, 2020), Rachael T. Gonzales

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that as to the crime of lewdness with a minor under 16 years old (under NRS 201.230), the defense as to mistake-of-fact for the age of the minor is not recognized. Although lewdness with a minor is a specific-intent crime, the element as to the age of the minor is not specific-intent.

Mdb Trucking, Llc V. Versa Prods. Co., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 72 (Nov. 5, 2020), Kiley Harrison

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Eight plaintiffs who were injured after a MDB trailer’s gate opened, dumping its contents onto the interstate, sued MDB and Versa. MDB cross-claimed against Versa, alleging the trailer’s Versa valve was designed defectively and dangerously, ultimately causing the accident.

A year went by between the accident and the start of litigation. During this time, MDB mechanics made regular maintenance repairs to the trailer that dumped on the interstate. The mechanics threw away the materials that were replaced, not believing they would be relevant to future litigation. The district court ordered case-terminating sanctions for MDB’s spoliation of evidence. The Nevada Supreme …

Jp Morgan Chase Bank V. Sfr Invs. Pool 1, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Oct. 29, 2020), Cecilia Diaz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This Court has previously held that the Federal Foreclosure Bar preempts NRS 116. 3116 and that a first deed of trust that secures a loan owned by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) or by a federal entity under the FHFA conservatorship is not extinguished by a homeowner’s association foreclosure sale. However, this Court has not addressed what statute of limitations applies to an action brought to enforce the Federal Foreclosure Bar. The Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) is the federal law that enacted the Federal Foreclosure Bar and sets out a statute of limitations depending on whether the …

Clark County V. Bean, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 65 (October 8, 2020), Tanner Castro

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court concludes that retirees are entitled to permanent partial disability benefits based on their wages earned immediately before retirement.

Apco Constr. V. Zitting Bros. Constr., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 26 (Oct. 8, 2020), Brendon Brandão

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Nevada’s Supreme Court held that pay-if-paid provisions in construction contracts, whereby a subcontractor is paid only if the general contractor is paid by the property owner for the work, are generally unenforceable because they violate public policy.2 However, this decision caused some confusion surrounding the enforceability of pay-if-paid provisions, leaving some believing they were no longer enforceable post-Lehrer. Here, the Court took the opportunity to clarify its stance on the enforceability of pay-if-paid provisions in Nevada.

Turner V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 62 (Oct. 1, 2020), Eli Bergida

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court affirmed Defendant's conviction, holding that Defendant waived his Bruton challenge, and that any other errors were harmless and did not warrant reversal.

Defendant was convicted of conspiracy to commit burglary, attempted burglary while in possession of a firearm or deadly weapon, two counts of attempted murder with use of a deadly weapon, and battery with use of a deadly weapon resulting in substantial bodily harm. On appeal, Defendant argued that, under Bruton, his Confrontation Clause rights were violated when the district court admitted a codefendant's statements. The Court affirmed, holding (1) the that Defendant waived his Bruton …

Cotter V. Kane, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 63 (Oct. 1, 2020), Connor Bodin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

After the death of former CEO and majority shareholder, James Cotter Sr., the Board of Directors for Reading International Inc. (“RDI”) terminated the status of then CEO and president, James Cotter Jr. Tensions rose, and James Cotter Jr. brought a derivative action against RDI and the Board. Eventually, summary judgment was rendered against James Cotter Jr., with costs.

On appeal, the Supreme Court of Nevada first determined a nominal defendant corporation, like RDI, may not challenge the underlying claims in a derivative action, but may challenge the shareholder plaintiff’s standing to bring such an action. Second, the Court adopted the …

Harvey V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 61 (Oct. 1, 2020), Brady Bathke

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In a case of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court considered whether NRS 175.101 precludes a judge other than the trial judge from deciding post-trial motions when there is no evidence that the trial judge is absent, deceased, sick, or disabled. Appellant Alfred Harvey requested that the trial judge in his case, Senior Judge James Bixler, preside over a post-trial motion. However, Judge Douglas Smith heard the post-trial motions and denied them. There was no evidence that Judge Bixler was prevented from hearing the post-trial motions because of being absent, deceased, sick, or disabled. The Court reversed Judge Smith’s order …

Gonzales V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 60 (Oct. 1, 2020), Mia Bacher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court ruled that a petition for habeas corpus based on ineffective assistance of counsel following a guilty plea must meet specific parameters based on the plain meaning of NRS 34.810(1)(a). The claim of ineffective assistance of counsel must be directly related to the guilty plea itself. It must be plead with specific facts showing that both the advice of counsel was objectively unreasonable and that it affected the outcome of the plea.

Washoe Cty. D.A.’S Office Vs. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 67 (Oct. 08, 2020), Kelsey Delozier

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This is a consolidated challenge, consisting of three cases, by the Washoe County District Attorney’s Office against the Second Judicial District Court’s ability to compel the D.A.’s office to participate in a record-sealing proceeding if it chooses to neither stipulate nor oppose the petition to seal. The Nevada Supreme Court granted the Washoe County D.A.’s writ petitions and ruled that if the D.A.’s Office chooses not to participate in a proceeding, the district court does not have the ability to compel it to do so.

Jesseph V. Digital Ally, Inc, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (Sept. 17, 2020), Wendy Antebi

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court held that predicate litigation is an essential element for a party to be awarded attorney fess under substantial benefit doctrine. The Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff’s claim for attorney’s fees because there was no predicate litigation.

Lopez V. Serbellon Protillo, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 54 (Aug. 6, 2020), Greer Sullivan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When determining whether the reunification prong of finding Special Immigrant Juvenile (hereinafter “SIJ”) status is satisfied, the court should consider the history of the parent-child relationship, the conditions in the child’s foreign country, and whether returning the child to the parent in the foreign country would be workable or practicable due to abandonment, abuse, or neglect.

Yount V. Criswell Radovan, Llc, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (July 30, 2020), Cristina Phipps

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The District Court did not err by dismissing Yount's claims for contractual damages. The Court held that Yount failed to prove damages because he received a benefit that was not functionally different than the benefit he sought. But because Yount did not provide express or implied consent to introduce post-pleading counterclaims, the district court abused its discretion when it awarded damages for those claims sua sponte.

Lofthouse V. State Of Nevada, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (Jul. 16, 2020), Chapman Noam

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that the plain language of NRS § 200.310(1) cannot be interpreted to mean that an adult teacher who engaged in sexual conduct with a minor student in violation of NRS § 201.540 had committed the predicate offense for first-degree kidnapping—perpetrating an unlawful act upon the person of the minor—when the minor was otherwise of sufficient age to consent and engage in sexual conduct with adults.

The Court also briefly discussed and denied appellant’s remaining claims arguing for reversal of the convictions for sexual conduct between a minor and teacher under NRS § 200.310(1) on the grounds of …

Pundyk V. State, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 43 (July 16, 2020), Joshua Nelson

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Expert witnesses may proffer testimony that embraces ultimate issues (such as a defendant’s mental state when he or she has entered a not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity plea). However, such testimony must be otherwise admissible and not stray from opinions about factual matters to conclusions about the appropriate verdict.