Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Anti-SLAPP (1)
- Civil Appeal (1)
- Comity (1)
- Defamation (1)
- Disclosure of Information (1)
-
- Discretionary-function immunity (1)
- Fair Report Privilege (1)
- False Light (1)
- Foreclosure (1)
- HOA (1)
- IIED (1)
- Immunity (1)
- Intrusion Upon Seclusion (1)
- Invasion of Privacy (1)
- Judicial proceeding (1)
- Juvenile (1)
- Media (1)
- Nevada Public Records Act (1)
- PUBLIC RECORDS DISCLOSURE: PRIVACY INTEREST (1)
- Publicity in a False Light (1)
- STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: NEVADA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (1)
- Sovereign Immunity (1)
- Tort Liability (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Republican Attorneys General Association V. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 3 (Feb. 20, 2020), Nicholas Hagenkord
Republican Attorneys General Association V. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 3 (Feb. 20, 2020), Nicholas Hagenkord
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) the district court did not err in denying appellant Republican Attorneys General Association’s (RAGA) petition for a writ of mandamus under the Nevada Public Records Act (NPRA) seeking bodycam footage regarding juveniles and former State Senator Aaron Ford’s interactions with police; and (2) the district court abused its discretion in denying RAGA’s request for other requested records by not assessing whether these records contain any nonconfidential material.
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.
Sfr Inv.'S Pool 1, Llc V. First Horizon Home Loans, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 4 (Feb. 1, 2018), Brendan Mcleod
Sfr Inv.'S Pool 1, Llc V. First Horizon Home Loans, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 4 (Feb. 1, 2018), Brendan Mcleod
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that, under provisions of NRS 116.31162, when an HOA records a notice of a foreclosure sale, any subsequent buyer who purchases the property is subject to that notice that a foreclosure may be imminent.
Adelson V. Harris, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 67 (Sept. 27, 2017) (En Banc), David E. Chavez
Adelson V. Harris, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 67 (Sept. 27, 2017) (En Banc), David E. Chavez
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Nevada Supreme Court (en banc) held that (1) a hyperlink to source material concerning a judicial proceeding may qualify as a report within the common law fair report privilege; and (2) Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute, as effective prior to the 2013 amendment, reaches communication “aimed at procuring any governmental or electoral action,” even if it is not addressed to a government agency.
Franchise Tax Bd. V. Hyatt, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (Sept. 14, 2017), Carmen Gilbert
Franchise Tax Bd. V. Hyatt, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 57 (Sept. 14, 2017), Carmen Gilbert
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found that discretionary-function immunity does not apply to intentional bad-faith tort claims. The Court also expressly adopted the false light invasion of privacy right of action in order to fully protect privacy interests. The Court also adopted the sliding scale approach for evaluating IIED claims, holding that increased severity of conduct will require less evidence to prove emotional distress.
Summary Of Franchise Tax Board Of The State Of California V. Hyatt, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 71, Stacy Newman, Jennifer Odell, Jaymes Orr, Patrick Phippen
Summary Of Franchise Tax Board Of The State Of California V. Hyatt, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 71, Stacy Newman, Jennifer Odell, Jaymes Orr, Patrick Phippen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court (1) affirmed the intentional tort and bad faith exceptions to discretionary-function immunity under NRS 41.032; (2) recognized the common law tort of publicity in a false light; (3) adopted the sliding-scale approach to proving a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress; (4) determined comity does not demand granting immunity from suit to foreign state government agencies if immunity would be available under that state’s laws, but not under Nevada law; and (5) determined comity does not require extending statutory caps to foreign state government agencies even if provided by law to Nevada government agencies.