Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Piroozi V. Eighth Jud. Dict. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 100 (Dec. 31, 2015), Jessie Folkestad
Piroozi V. Eighth Jud. Dict. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 100 (Dec. 31, 2015), Jessie Folkestad
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Real parties in interest, Hurst and Abbington sought and obtained a pretrial order from the district court barring petitioners, Dr. Piroozi and Dr. Blahnik, from arguing comparative fault of settled defendants at trial and including those defendants’ names on the verdict forms. In granting the Writ of Mandamus filed by the petitioners, the Supreme Court of Nevada resolved a conflict between NRS 41.141(3) and NRS 41A.045, holding that NRS 41A.045 preempts NRS 41.141(3) and entitles a defendant to argue the percentage of fault of settled defendants at trial and to include the settled defendant’s names on the jury verdict form.
Harrison V. Roitman, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 92 (Dec. 17, 2015), Michael Coggeshall
Harrison V. Roitman, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 92 (Dec. 17, 2015), Michael Coggeshall
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that absolute immunity applies to party-retained expert witnesses as well as court appointed witnesses. Party-retained expert witnesses have absolute immunity from suits for damages arising from statements made in the course of judicial proceedings.
Anderson V. Mandalay Corp., Nev. Adv. Op. 82 (Oct. 10, 2015), Emily Haws
Anderson V. Mandalay Corp., Nev. Adv. Op. 82 (Oct. 10, 2015), Emily Haws
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined (1) NRS § 41.745(1)(c) sets forth a factual inquiry; (2) a reasonable jury could find it “reasonably foreseeable under the facts and circumstances of the case considering the nature and scope of his . . . employment” that a hotel employee would rape a hotel guest; and (3) direct negligence claims against an employer are not futile when a reasonable jury could conclude under the facts that the employer could reasonably foresee the employee’s unlawful act.
Frazier V. Drake, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 64 (Sep. 3, 2015), Adrian Viesca
Frazier V. Drake, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 64 (Sep. 3, 2015), Adrian Viesca
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court of Appeals determined that (1) when three of the good-faith Beattie factors weigh in favor of the party that rejected the offer of judgment, the reasonableness of the fees requested by the offeror becomes irrelevant, and cannot, by itself, support a decision to award attorney fees to the offeror and (2) expert witness fees in excess of $1,500 now have factors to take into consideration in awarding such fees.
Sanders V. Sears-Page, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 50, Scott Lundy
Sanders V. Sears-Page, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 50, Scott Lundy
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that the district court erred in deciding not to strike an empaneled juror whose background implied bias, but who promised he could remain impartial. Moreover, the Court held the district court erred in allowing challenges for cause while the juror was present, and by allowing newly discovered evidence to be entered into evidence on the final day of trial.
Summary Of C. Nicholas Pereos, Ltd. V. Bank Of America, N.A., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 61553 (July 2, 2015), Stacy Newman
Summary Of C. Nicholas Pereos, Ltd. V. Bank Of America, N.A., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 61553 (July 2, 2015), Stacy Newman
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considers an appeal from a district court summary judgment in a tort case concerning losses sustained due to unauthorized activity in a customer’s bank account. The Court reversed the grant of summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether respondent Bank of America acted reasonably in delivering bank statements, and also because the appellant’s suit was not time barred under a one year period of repose.
Summary Of Karen Brown V. Eddie World, Inc.; And Stagecoach Hotel And Casino, Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (April 16, 2015), Daven Cameron
Summary Of Karen Brown V. Eddie World, Inc.; And Stagecoach Hotel And Casino, Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (April 16, 2015), Daven Cameron
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
While acknowledging the enforcement gaming laws as a fundamental public policy in Nevada, the Court declined to recognize a common law cause of action for third-party retaliatory discharge.
Summary Of Cadle Co. V. Woods & Erickson Llp, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (Mar. 26, 2015), Adam Wynott
Summary Of Cadle Co. V. Woods & Erickson Llp, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (Mar. 26, 2015), Adam Wynott
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held Nevada does not recognize accessory liability for fraudulent transfers. Additionally, the Court ruled a court may only award costs based on a showing of sufficient evidence that a cost is reasonable, required, and incurred.