Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil Appeal (5)
- Defamation (4)
- Civil (3)
- Administrative Agency (2)
- Foreclosure (2)
-
- HOA (2)
- Lien (2)
- Medical malpractice (2)
- Negligence (2)
- Torts (2)
- Trusts (2)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (1)
- Absolute Privilege to Publish (1)
- Agents (1)
- Anti-SLAPP (1)
- Appellate (1)
- Assignability of Judgment (1)
- Assumption of the Risk (1)
- Attorney Fees (1)
- Attorney-Client Privilege (1)
- Attorneys (1)
- Auerbach Test (1)
- BUSINESS LAW (1)
- Battery (1)
- Benefits (1)
- Business (1)
- Business Judgment Rule (1)
- Business Law (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: ANTITRUST (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 70
Full-Text Articles in Law
Seibel V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 73 (Nov. 23, 2022), Tzu-Wen Lin
Seibel V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 73 (Nov. 23, 2022), Tzu-Wen Lin
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
In this opinion drafted by Justice Hardesty, the Court clarifies the burden of proof that district courts are to use when determining whether the crime-fraud exception should apply under NRS 49.115(1). The Court holds that the party seeking to invoke the crime-fraud exception must satisfy a two-part test which the party must show by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) “the client was engaged in or planning a criminal or fraudulent scheme when it sought the advice of counsel to further the scheme” and (2) the attorney-client communications for which production is sought are “sufficiently related to and were made …
Eby V. Johnston Law Office, P.C., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 56 (Sep. 08, 2022), Davit Sargsian
Eby V. Johnston Law Office, P.C., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 56 (Sep. 08, 2022), Davit Sargsian
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s decision to strike the second amended complaint and reversed the decision to dismiss the remaining malpractice claim with prejudice. According to Nevada’s Uniform Power of Attorney Act, the Court held a non-lawyer agent working under a power of attorney regarding claims and litigation could not litigate an action pro se in place of the principal or engage in the practice of law on the principal’s behalf. The trial court correctly held that the appellant’s non-lawyer agent under a power of attorney was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. The decision to …
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 55 (July 28, 2022), Christopher Sommers
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 138 Nev. Adv. Op. 55 (July 28, 2022), Christopher Sommers
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
In an opinion drafted by Justice Cadish, the Court clarifies whether a plaintiff has the standing to assert a deceptive trade practice claim under NRS 41.600(1) when the plaintiff never purchased or used products manufactured by the defendant. The Court found that a plaintiff has standing as long as they can show they are directly harmed by the deceptive trade practices of the defendant. Additionally, it found that the plaintiffs pleaded sufficient facts, including that they were directly harmed by the petitioner’s false and misleading advertising. Thus, the Court denied the defendant’s petition for writ relief.
Cummings V. Barber, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (April 2, 2020), Alexis Taitel
Cummings V. Barber, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (April 2, 2020), Alexis Taitel
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
No abstract provided.
Jaramillo V. Ramos, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2020), Jose Tafoya
Jaramillo V. Ramos, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2020), Jose Tafoya
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found a plaintiff is not required to provide expert testimony to survive a defendant’s summary judgment motion when the plaintiff is relying on the res ipsa loquitur statute’s prima facie case of negligence. Rather, plaintiff must only establish facts that entitle it to a rebuttable presumption of negligence under Nevada’s res ipsa loquitur statute. Whether a defendant can rebut the presumption through their own expert testimony or evidence is a question of fact for the jury.
Reynolds V. Tufenkjian, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Apr. 9, 2020), Brittni Tanenbaum
Reynolds V. Tufenkjian, 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Apr. 9, 2020), Brittni Tanenbaum
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered whether a party who purchased a judgment debtor’s rights of action could motion the Court to substitute themselves in as the real party in interest and dismiss the appeal. The Court held that only “things in action” that are otherwise assignable may be subject to execution to satisfy a judgment. The Court concluded that tort claims for personal injury—including fraud/intentional misrepresentation and elder exploitation—are generally not assignable. The Court further concluded that tort claims for injury to property and contract-based claims, unless the claims are personal in nature, are generally assignable. Therefore, the Court granted the respondents’ …
In Re Raggio Family Trust, 136 Nev. Ad. Op. 21 (Apr. 9, 2020), Aariel Williams
In Re Raggio Family Trust, 136 Nev. Ad. Op. 21 (Apr. 9, 2020), Aariel Williams
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that neither the language in the trust instrument nor NRS 163.4175 requires the trustee to consider the beneficiary’s other assets before making distributions from the trust.
State Of Nevada Department Of Employment, Training & Rehabilitation, Employment Security Division V. Sierra National Corporation, D/B/A The Love Ranch, A Nevada Corporation, 136 Nev., Adv. Op. 11 (Mar. 26, 2020), Alexandra Matloff
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that because the records requested by the legal brothel the Love Ranch do not violate the limitations set forth in NRS 612.265, the district court was correct to grant the Love Ranch’s petition for a writ of mandamus.
Chandra V. Schulte, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 66 (December 26, 2019), Michael Desmond
Chandra V. Schulte, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 66 (December 26, 2019), Michael Desmond
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) the spousal exception bars recovery from the Nevada Real Estate Education, Research and Recovery Fund (“Fund”) for fraud incurred during the period of the marriage and (2) where a spouse co-owned the defrauded property, the surviving spouse may not recover from the Fund.
Rosen V. Tarkanian, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (December 12, 2019), Andrew Brown
Rosen V. Tarkanian, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (December 12, 2019), Andrew Brown
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
This issue was whether several of Jacky Rosen’s statements about Danny Tarkanian made during her political campaign constituted defamation. The Court determined that Rosen’s political statements were made in good faith and, therefore, the case was reversed and remanded with instructions for the district court to grant the special motion to dismiss.
Toll V. Dist. Ct. (Gilman), 135 Nev., Advanced Opinion 58 (December 5, 2019), Gabrielle Boliou
Toll V. Dist. Ct. (Gilman), 135 Nev., Advanced Opinion 58 (December 5, 2019), Gabrielle Boliou
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
A blogger claimed that his sources are protected under NRS 49.275. The court held that digital media is protected, but did not address whether a blogger is protected. The district court did not err in allowing discovery to determine whether the blogger acted with actual malice.
In Re Application Of Finley, Nevada Ct. App., No. 76715-Coa (July 25, 2019), Ben Coonan
In Re Application Of Finley, Nevada Ct. App., No. 76715-Coa (July 25, 2019), Ben Coonan
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The court found that the lower court had erroneously applied the incorrect statute in determining the requisite waiting period to file an application to seal records, and reversed and remanded with instructions for the lower court to apply the updated statute. The court found Finley’s argument – that a later court is prohibited from considering that conviction in an application to seal further records once record of a conviction has been sealed – without merit because statutory language expressly permits courts to consider sealed records in future applications.
Mcnamee V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 52 (Oct. 17, 2019), Alfa Alemayehu
Mcnamee V. Eighth Judicial District Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 52 (Oct. 17, 2019), Alfa Alemayehu
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court overruled Barto v. Weishaar, partly granted the petitioner’s writ of mandamus, and held that if a suggestion of death is properly served, the 90-day deadline to file a motion to substitute is triggered regardless of which party files it and whether it identifies the deceased party’s successor or representative.
Saticoy Bay Llc V. Nev. Ass’N Servs., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 23 (Jul. 3, 2019), Katrina Fadda
Saticoy Bay Llc V. Nev. Ass’N Servs., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 23 (Jul. 3, 2019), Katrina Fadda
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that (1) under Nevada's HOA foreclosure redemption statute NRS 116.31166(3) a homeowner may use proceeds from the foreclosure sale to go towards redemption of the property; and (2) that sufficient compliance with the statute is enough to satisfy the statute's requirements.
Waste Mgmt. Of Nev., Inc. V. W. Taylor Street, Llc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 21 (Jun. 27, 2019), Trisha Delos Santos
Waste Mgmt. Of Nev., Inc. V. W. Taylor Street, Llc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 21 (Jun. 27, 2019), Trisha Delos Santos
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) the district court properly determined that garbage liens are perpetual; (2) that the district court erred in applying the lien perfection requirements contained in NRS 108.226; and (3) erred in applying the two-year statute of limitations contained in NRS 11.190(4)(b) to the foreclosure of those liens under NRS 444.520.Therefore, a garbage lien is not subject to a statute of limitations and a municipal waste management company may foreclose upon such a lien under NRS 444.520(4).
Coker V. Sassone, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 3, 2019), Whitney Jones
Coker V. Sassone, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 3, 2019), Whitney Jones
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court clarified that the appropriate standard of review for a district court’s denial or grant of an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss is de novo.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
Baiguen V. Harrah’S Las Vegas, Llc, 134 Nev., Adv. Op. 71 (Sept. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Scott Whitworth
Baiguen V. Harrah’S Las Vegas, Llc, 134 Nev., Adv. Op. 71 (Sept. 13, 2018) (En Banc), Scott Whitworth
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) an employee’s injuries that originate before entering the workplace but are aggravated due to an employer’s failure to provide timely medical assistance arise out of and in the course of employment; and (2) that employees’ recovery against their employers for such injuries are confined to the exclusive remedies for workers’ compensation under the Nevada Industrial Insurance Act (NIIA).
Nev. Recycling & Salvage V. Reno Disposal, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 55 (Aug. 2, 2018) (En Banc), Carmen Gilbert
Nev. Recycling & Salvage V. Reno Disposal, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 55 (Aug. 2, 2018) (En Banc), Carmen Gilbert
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of respondents, holding that appellants lacked standing to bring an antitrust claim because they were unable to show that they suffered any injuries.
Coles (Brent) V. Bisbee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 62. (Aug. 2, 2018), Tamara Cannella
Coles (Brent) V. Bisbee, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 62. (Aug. 2, 2018), Tamara Cannella
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that the use of the Static-99R assessment conforms with the assessment requirements under NRS 213.1214. It additionally determined that modifications to parole procedures do not constitute an ex post facto violation unless the changes create a significant risk of prolonging an inmate’s incarceration.
West Sunset 2050 Trust V. Nationstar Mortgage, L.L.C., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (Jun. 28, 2018), Shaneka J. Malloyd
West Sunset 2050 Trust V. Nationstar Mortgage, L.L.C., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (Jun. 28, 2018), Shaneka J. Malloyd
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found that a foreclosure sale is not invalid due to lack of notice where: (1) a homeowners association (HOA) fails to serve the Notice of Default (NOD) to the recorded beneficiary of the deed of trust and (2) that recorded beneficiary’s successor in interest is unable to demonstrate how it was prejudiced or injured by the defective notice to their predecessor in interest. Further, a HOA does not lose standing to foreclose on a property when it enters into a factoring agreement that does not change the relationship between debtor and lender.
Comm’N Of Ethics Of The State Of Nevada V. Hansen, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 40 (May 31, 2018), Landon Littlefield
Comm’N Of Ethics Of The State Of Nevada V. Hansen, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 40 (May 31, 2018), Landon Littlefield
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Nevada Supreme Court dismissed an appeal from a district court order granting a petition for judicial review because without authorization from the client the notice of appeal was void.
Dolores V. State, Dep’T Of Employment Sec. Div., 134 Nev. 34 (May 3, 2018), Xheni Ristani
Dolores V. State, Dep’T Of Employment Sec. Div., 134 Nev. 34 (May 3, 2018), Xheni Ristani
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered whether, pursuant to NRS 612.380, an employee that resigns when faced with a resign-or-be-fired option does so voluntarily, and is thereby disqualified from unemployment benefits. The Court determined that where the record shows that the appellant’s decision to resign was freely given and stemming from his own choice, the resignation is voluntary.
Las Vegas Dev. Grp., Llc V. Blaha, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (May 3, 2018), Emily Meibert
Las Vegas Dev. Grp., Llc V. Blaha, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (May 3, 2018), Emily Meibert
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considers whether the time limitations of NRS 107.080(5)-(6) bars an action challenging an NRS Chapter 107 nonjudicial foreclosure where it is alleged that the deed of trust had been extinguished before the sale. This action challenges the authority to conduct the sale rather than the manner; thus, limitations do not apply.
Clark Cty. Office Of The Coroner/Med. Exam'r V. Las Vegas Review-Journal, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 24. (April 12, 2018) (En Banc), Tamara Cannella
Clark Cty. Office Of The Coroner/Med. Exam'r V. Las Vegas Review-Journal, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 24. (April 12, 2018) (En Banc), Tamara Cannella
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Under NRCP 62(d) and NRCP 62(e), state and local government appellants are generally entitled to a stay of a money judgment pending appeal, without needing to post a supersedeas bond or other security as a matter of right.
Kirsch V. Traber, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (Apr. 5, 2018), Landon Littlefield
Kirsch V. Traber, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (Apr. 5, 2018), Landon Littlefield
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Nevada Supreme Court, applying the Restatement (Second) of Judgments definition of “final judgment,” held that it was proper for the district court to accord preclusive effect to a subsequent final judgment from a foreign court.