Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

2006

Civil Procedure

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Law

Summary Of Washoe Med. Ctr. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 110, Aubree Nielsen Dec 2006

Summary Of Washoe Med. Ctr. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 110, Aubree Nielsen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

An appeal involving an issue of first impression – whether a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action may amend her complaint, under NRCP 15(a), to comply with NRS 41A.071, which requires that complaints for medical malpractice be accompanied by a medical expert affidavit.


Summary Of Millen V. Dist. Ct., Nev. Adv. Op. No. 105, Sherry Moore Dec 2006

Summary Of Millen V. Dist. Ct., Nev. Adv. Op. No. 105, Sherry Moore

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The district court judge disqualified petitioner’s counsel because petitioner’s counsel was on the judge’s recusal list. Petitioner filed a writ of mandamus to prevent the district court judge’s disqualification of her attorney from representing her at trial.


Summary Of Rocker V. Kpmg Llp, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 101, 148 P.3d 703, Matt Lay Dec 2006

Summary Of Rocker V. Kpmg Llp, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 101, 148 P.3d 703, Matt Lay

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from an order of the Eighth Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, granting motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to plead with particularity.


Summary Of Brent G. Theobald Constr. V. Richardson Constr., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 98, Michelle L'Hommedieu Dec 2006

Summary Of Brent G. Theobald Constr. V. Richardson Constr., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 98, Michelle L'Hommedieu

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.


Summary Of Winston Products Co. V. Deboer, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, Dustin Howell May 2006

Summary Of Winston Products Co. V. Deboer, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 4, Dustin Howell

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case examines “the method used to compute the time for filing motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial and the tolling period to file a notice of appeal when these motions are served by mail or electronic means.”2 This case also addresses the issue of whether tolling motions also toll the time to appeal from a post-judgment order awarding attorney fees and costs.


Summary Of International Game Tech. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Krystal Gallagher Feb 2006

Summary Of International Game Tech. V. Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Krystal Gallagher

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petitioner, Nevada’s Attorney General, appeals from the district courts’ refusals to dismiss actions brought under Nevada’s False Claims Act (“FCA”) by respondents, James McAndrews and Beeler, Schad & Diamond, P.C. Nevada permits individuals to become private attorneys general, which grants individuals the right to sue on behalf of the state. This individual is known as a quitam plaintiff. After filing an action, the quitam plaintiff must send the Attorney General a copy of the complaint and a written disclosure of all material information, and then the complaint is sealed. The complaint remains sealed and the defendants are not served until the Attorney General decides whether to intervene. From here, the Attorney General may choose to intervene and to proceed with the action. If the Attorney General intervenes and elects to proceed with the action, the quitam plaintiff must relinquish control of the litigation but may remain a party to the action. On the other hand, if the Attorney General chooses not to intervene initially, the Attorney General may still later intervene upon timely application “if the interest of the State . . . in recovery of the money or property involved is not being adequately represented by the private plaintiff.”2 In addition, the Attorney General may settle the action and “may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”3 Respondent, McAndrews, filed suit under the FCA against International Game Technology, Anchor Coin, Inc., and Spin For Cash Wide Area Progressive (“IGT”). McAndrews filed suit because IGT allegedly falsified tax records. After receiving a copy of McAndrew’s FCA complaint, the Nevada Attorney General asked the Nevada Department of Taxation (“tax department”) to perform an audit of IGT. The Attorney General then elected to intervene pursuant to NRS 357.080(4) and moved to dismiss the false claims action for several reasons: (1) the FCA does not cover tax matters; (2) Nevada’s tax-collection preempts false claims actions brought by private litigants based on tax deficiencies; and (3) good cause is present in order to dismiss the action. The district court denied the Attorney General’s motion to dismiss and held that the express language of Nevada’s FCA does not forbid tax deficiency claims. Furthermore, the district court found that the Attorney General failed to demonstrate good cause for dismissal ...


Summary Of Mccrary V. Bianco, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, Eunice Kasiske Feb 2006

Summary Of Mccrary V. Bianco, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, Eunice Kasiske

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Thomas and Rebecca McCrary (“McCrary”) appealed from a post-verdict district court order awarding attorney fees based upon the cost shifting provisions of NRCP 68 and NRS 17.115. Dominic Bianco (“Bianco”) cross-appealed from the denial of its motion for partial satisfaction of judgment. McCrary unsuccessfully argued that the district court erred in its failure to consider pre-offer attorney fees and costs as part of its determination of the total judgment for cost-shifting purposes. McCrary successfully argued that the district court erred in not including pre-offer prejudgment interest in its comparison between the total amount awarded and the offer of judgment ...


Summary Of Koller V. State, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 20, Amy S. Scarborough Jan 2006

Summary Of Koller V. State, 122 Nev. Adv. Op. 20, Amy S. Scarborough

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from a writ of prohibition granted by the Third Judicial District Court, State of Nevada.