Digital Commons Network^™

Andrew Young V. State Of Nevada, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 20 (July 20, 2023), Keaunui Harris

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

On appeal from a judgment of conviction, the appellant must have made timely objections to preserve the record in order to facilitate appellate review. Additionally, there are three types of juror bias that may lead to the removal of a juror: actual bias, implied bias, and inferable bias. If a juror’s statements establish implied or inferable bias, the juror must be removed regardless of whether that juror subsequently expresses impartiality. By contrast, if a juror’s statements suggest actual bias, the juror can still serve on the jury panel if the district court, after canvassing the juror, determines that they will …

In Re Guardianship Of Jones, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (July 6, 2023), Chase Christensen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A District Court may remove a guardian and appoint a successor without the filing of a formal, written petition. However, the protected person has appellate standing to challenge said removal and appointment. Further, a protected person has a procedural due process right to notice of a District Court’s removal and appointment considerations, but such notice may be met by court filings and court hearings where that consideration is frequently and sufficiently noted. Finally, while the District Court may not shift the burden onto the protected person to file a communication and visitation petition, the Appellant failed to meet their evidentiary …

In Re Parental Rights As To G.R.S., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 16 (July 6, 2023), Emily Kunz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A parent’s rights to their children cannot be terminated because a parent struggles with substance abuse but is able to safely and effectively parent their children.

Monk V. Ching, M.D., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Jul. 6, 2023), Alexander Provan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 41A.071 provides that any action for professional negligence shall be dismissed if it is filed without an affidavit which supports the allegations. A Nurse is not categorically barred from providing an affidavit for a professional negligence action against a physician. But the affidavit must specify the acts of negligence of each respondent and how each action breached a standard of care to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.

Moreover, NRS 41A.100 provides an exception to the affidavit requirement when foreign objects are left in a body during surgery. Gauze which are left in a wound as part of post- …

Alfaro V. State Of Nevada, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 24 (Aug. 24, 2023), Ciara Clark

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court upheld Alfaro's convictions on seven counts of sexual assault and two counts of lewdness with a minor under the age of 14. Alfaro challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and argued that some counts were redundant and cited evidentiary and jury instruction errors. The Court reversed one conviction for lewdness as redundant and remanded for correction of the judgment. The Court upheld Alfaro’s remaining nine convictions, deeming there was adequate evidence to support the charges.

Clark County Association Of School Administrators And Professional-Technical Employees V. Clark County School District; Education Support Employees Association; And Clark County Education Association, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (May 11, 2023), Emily Kunz

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 388G.610 transfers authority from a superintendent to a local school in hiring decisions. Because the authority of a school district is subject to collective bargaining agreements, the transferred authority now held by the local school is also subject to collective bargaining agreements.

Pepper V. C.R. England, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 11 (May. 4, 2023), Chase Christensen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A party moving to dismiss for forum non conveniens fails to meet their evidentiary burden when they fail to submit an affidavit in support of their motion. Additionally, a sister- state-resident plaintiff is “foreign” for the purposes of a forum non conveniens analysis.

Lvmpd V. Holland, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 10 (Apr. 20, 2023), Jefferson Cummings

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court addressed the burden of proof for an NRS 617.457 occupational heart disease claim, when an NRS 617.457(11) defense is raised alleging that the employee failed to correct predisposing conditions. In order to raise an affirmative defense under NRS 617.457(11), the employer bears the burden of proving (1) the employee had a predisposing condition that leads to the disease, (2) the employee was “ordered in writing by the examining physician” to correct the predisposing condition, (3) the employee failed to correct the predisposing condition, and (4) the correction was “within the ability of the employee.”2 It is …

Wishengrad V. Carrington Mortg. Servs. [State Of Nevada], 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 13 (May 18, 2023), Keaunui Harris

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 104.3104 provides that certain documents may constitute “negotiable instruments” for the purpose of enforcing a promise to pay. Under NRS 104.3104(1), a home equity line of credit agreement (HELOC) may be classified as a negotiable instrument if it has a defined maturity date and closed draw period. The same HELOC may also be classified as a “promissory note” under NRS 104.3104(5). When the borrowers fail to repay funds provided to them under the terms of an HELOC, the loan servicer and trustee are entitled to foreclose upon the borrowers’ home. Finally, even if a borrower’s property is held in …

Vernon Newson, Jr., V. The State Of Nevada, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 9 (Mar. 30, 2023), Jordan Marchello

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

To determine whether remote testimony by way of video-conferencing satisfies a defendant's constitutional right to confrontation, a district court must find that (1) permitting a witness to testify remotely is necessary to further a compelling public policy interest, and (2) the testimony is otherwise reliable. In this case, the Nevada Supreme Court held that although efforts to curtail the spread of the COVID-19 virus may constitute a compelling public policy interest, a district court must make specific findings as to why permitting a particular witness to testify remotely furthers this interest. Here, the district court erred in not requiring such …

Ramos V. Franklin, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 6 (Mar. 16, 2023), Alexander Provan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 125C.050 provides that certain relatives and other persons may petition for visitation with a minor child.2 Under the statute, a court may only order visitation when the minor child’s parents “deny or unreasonably restrict visits with the child.”3 When the parents of the child have joint custody and one parent provides the petitioner with sufficient contact with the minor child so that visitation was not denied or unreasonably restricted, the petition for visitation fails regardless of the parent who provides contact.

N. Las Vegas Infra. Inv. V. N. Las Vegas, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (Mar. 16, 2023), Mark Mulhall

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Even when a section of a contract is unambiguous, the section’s meaning can be ambiguous when read with the entirety of the contract and its appendices. The ambiguity can then be resolved by reading the contract and its appendices together to ascertain the intent of the parties. Additionally, a district court’s decision to deny awarding attorney fees under NRCP 68(f)(1)(B) will not be disturbed if the record clearly shows the district court properly considered the Beattie factors. Lastly, taxable costs will be awarded under NRS 18.005 when those costs are truly necessarily incurred, unless otherwise enumerated.

Nat’L Ass’N Of Mut. Ins. Co. V. State Of Nev. Dep’T Of Bus. & Indus., Div. Of Ins., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 3 (Feb. 16, 2023), Colin Meenk

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Division of Insurance’s (the Division) enabling statutes provide it with authority to promulgate regulations protecting against unfair use of consumer credit information. Its new regulation, R087-20, imposes only limitations and not a blanket ban on the use of consumer credit information and does not interfere with existing statutory provisions. The Legislature has provided adequate interpretation and guidance standards to the Division to constitute a constitutional delegation of authority such that the Division’s approved promulgation of R087-20 does not mean its enabling statutes are unconstitutional delegations of authority.

Las Vegas Review-Journal, Inc., V. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’T, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 8 (Mar. 30, 2023), Lindsay Reynolds

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Pertaining to the Nevada Public Records Act (NPRA), NRS 49.335 does not justify withholding public records in their entirety simply because some portion of the record identifies an individual. Under the generalized balancing test, to determine whether disclosure of public records is appropriate, the government entity bears the burden of proving that its nondisclosure interests clearly outweigh the public’s interest. Further, under the Clark County School District’s (CCSD’s) burden-shifting balancing test, speculative harm to nontrivial personal privacy interests is insufficient to shift the burden from the governmental entity to the plaintiff.

Reggio V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 4 (Mar. 9, 2023), Theodore Milk

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Where the first party of a consolidated case waives their right to a peremptory challenge under Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 48.1(5), the waiver applies to subsequent parties on the same side of the consolidation. While parties are still entitled to an additional peremptory challenge when their case is reassigned under SCR 48.1(9), this is only permitted when the first case is reassigned, not the second.

Brett Gilman V. Clark Cnty. School Dist. And Sierra Nevada Administrators, 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 7 (Mar. 16, 2023), Ben Reber

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In order to deny a claim for coverage for a specific body part under a worker’s compensation policy, the denial must be made in writing, specifying that that body part is denied. A finding that an injury to a specific body part was impliedly denied coverage under a worker’s compensation claim because it wasn’t listed among the specifically approved body parts violates NRS 616C.065 and NRS 616C.390.

Igtiben V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 140 Nev. Adv. Rep. 9 (Feb. 22, 2024), Laura Lomeli

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Court of Appeals held that the district court failed to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint for professional negligence and wrongful death because the claims were untimely under NRS 41A.097(2) since they were filed two years and ten months from date on which real party in interest received the relevant medical records. The Court highlighted the lack of dispute surrounding the receipt of the medical records—noting that an only an impediment such as concealment of records would prevent inquiry notice tolling to begin, which was not the case here. The Court noted that receipt of all relevant records will constitute inquiry …

In Re B.J.W.-A., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 1 (Jan. 12, 2023), Mackenzie Sullivan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Supreme Court of Nevada addressed the exception to the category A felony designation for lewdness with a child under NRS 201.230, and considered whether the juvenile court abused its discretion in certifying the appellant to stand trial as an adult. B.J. appealed the juvenile court decision to not accept jurisdiction and to certify B.J. as an adult for criminal proceedings. The Court found that the Legislature did not create a mandatory rule in NRS 201.230(5) requiring that all minors charged with lewdness with a child be adjudicated only in juvenile court. The Court also concluded that the juvenile court …

Tahican, Llc V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Feb. 2, 2023), Josette Vanderlaan

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Under NRS 14.010(1), a party may record a lis pendens “[i]n an action . . . affecting the title or possession of real property.” A claim of fraudulent transfer of real property seeking avoidance of the transfer supports a lis pendens because the relief sought affects the title or possession of the real property. The recording party does not need to be entitled to title or possession of the property to support a lis pendens.

Taylor V. Brill, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Dec. 15, 2022), Jefferson Cummings

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Judges are required to disqualify themselves when their impartiality might be questioned, such as if they have previously presided as judge over the matter in another court. A judge is said to preside over a matter when they have exercised some control or authority over the matter, not when they have had purely administrative contact.

Washoe Cty. Human Servs. V. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 87 (Dec. 29, 2022), Rachel Blum

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Nevada Supreme Court considered this writ of mandamus as it held substantial precedential value and was a matter of first impression. Although the controversy was moot, they decided to hear the issue, as the duration of the challenges action is relatively short and a similar issue is likely to arise in the future. Further, the Court found the matter to be important, because the issue related to the protection of Nevada children. The Court held that NRS 432B.393(3)(c) is constitutional, as it does not infringe on the due process rights of parents concerning the altering or termination of custody …

Arce V. Sanchez, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Dec. 22, 2022), Joe Coronel

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Judge Stiglich issued the opinion. The issue was of first impression and asked if under NRCP 60(b) a District court could set aside a judgment, confirming a court-annexed arbitration award.2 This would go against Nevada Arbitration Rule (NAR) 19(C) limiting post-judgment relief only to that which corrects clerical mistakes and errors.3 The court held NAR 19(C) prevents a district court from granting post -judgment relief under NRCP 60(b) in the form of setting aside a judgment confirming an arbitration award. Thus, the court remanded and reversed the district court’s judgment and gave instructions to reinstate the arbitration award.

Republican Nat’L Comm. V. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 88 (Dec. 29, 2022), Savanna Bierne

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In a per curiam opinion, The Nevada Supreme Court denied the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) emergency writ requesting mandatory statutory compliance by the Clark County Registrar. The Court found that the RNC incorrectly interpreted Nevada election statutes and failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the requested relief.

Nelson V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 82 (Dec. 22, 2022), Shannon Chao

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A law firm is not automatically disqualified based on a paralegal’s imputed conflict of interest unless there is actual disclosure of confidences or ineffective screening measures. Additionally, district courts have broad discretion in determining whether a law firm must be disqualified, and whether to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine adequacy of screening measures.

Nelson V. Burr, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Dec. 29, 2022), Isabel Causey

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Legal malpractice claims which arise from advice given during the drafting of an estate plan are transactional legal malpractice claims. NRS 11.207(1) provides a two-year statute of limitations for both transactional and litigation-based legal malpractice claims. However, the Court has applied a litigation-malpractice tolling rule which delays the statute of limitations until the litigation in which the malpractice occurred ends and damages are certain. This tolling rule only applies to litigation-based claims. Therefore, because estate planning is transactional the tolling rule does not apply. Instead, when a litigant files or must defend against a lawsuit occasioned by transactional malpractice, they …

Mack V. Williams, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 86 (Dec. 29, 2022), John Bolliger

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

To determine if a private right of action exists for a violation of a self-executing provision of the Nevada Constitution, the court applies a three-step test. First, the court asks whether the language and history of the constitutional provision established an indication of intent to provide or withhold the requested remedy. If answered negatively, the court then considers whether the several factors set forth in § 874A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts favors the requested remedy. Third, the Court considers if any special factors counsel hesitation in the recognition of monetary damages. In this case the Nevada Supreme Court …

Las Vegas Rev. J. V. Clark Cty. Ofc. Of The Coroner/Med. Exam’R., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 80 (Dec. 15, 2022), Ryan Edwards

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A District Court Judge must adequately explain a reduction of an appropriately granted award of attorney’s fees under the Nevada Public Records Act (NPRA).2 The explanation must consider the four Brunzell factors: (1) quality of the advocate; (2) the character of the work needed to be done; (3) the work performed; and (4) the result.3 Generally, the greater the amount of the reduction, the more thorough an explanation must be.

In Re Tr. Agreement, 23 Partners Tr. I, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 84 (Dec. 22, 2022), Chase Christensen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Where an irrevocable trust uses terms to distinguish between different classes of beneficiary, the court must look at the usage of those terms within the instrument to determine whether a beneficiary is entitled to an accounting of the trust. Additionally, NRS 165.180 only stands for the proposition that NRS Chapter 165 does not contain an exhaustive list of the district court’s power over trusts. NRS 165.180 does not stand as an independent grant of powers not otherwise listed in the chapter.

In Re Tr. Agreement Of Davies, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 89 (Dec. 29, 2022), Camille Bayard

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In an opinion authored by Justice Pickering, following both the NRS and California law, the Court affirmed the district court’s holding, finding that a written instrument can transfer assets within a trust with real property, without a separate deed and, a description of real property held in trust satisfies the Statute of Frauds so long as the description provides sufficient means to identify the property using extrinsic evidence.

Martin V. Martin, 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 78 (Dec. 01, 2022), Caitlin Gwin

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In this decision authored by Justice Stiglich, the Court held that a property settlement incident to a divorce decree is enforceable when it requires a divorcing veteran spouse to make payments from military disability pay. Although federal law prohibits state courts from awarding veteran disability pay in a divorce, the Court found an indemnification provision in a property settlement resulting in the payment of disability pay was enforceable because the parties had previously negotiated and agreed to the terms. While the Court would not have been able to award veteran disability pay as part of a property settlement, the divorcing …