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

Law Commons™

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

Series

2019

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Articles 31 - 49 of 49

Full-Text Articles in Law

Poole V. Nev. Auto Dealership Inv.’S, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 39 (Sept. 5, 2019), Petya Pucci Sep 2019

Poole V. Nev. Auto Dealership Inv.’S, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 39 (Sept. 5, 2019), Petya Pucci

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that under the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“NDTPA”) , (1) “knowingly” means that “the defendant is aware that the facts exist that constitute the act or omission”, and (2) that a fact is “material” if either (a) “a reasonable person would attach importance to its existence or nonexistence in determining a choice of action in the transaction in question,” or b) “the defendant knows or has reason to know that the consumer regards or is likely to regard the matter as important in determining a choice of action, although a reasonable person may not so regard …

Go to article

Spar Bus. Serv.'S, Inc. Vs. Olson, 135 Nev. Adv. Opn. No. 40 (2019), Misha Ray Sep 2019

Spar Bus. Serv.'S, Inc. Vs. Olson, 135 Nev. Adv. Opn. No. 40 (2019), Misha Ray

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

As a matter of first impression, the Court found that the 45-day service requirement for review of administrative decisions is not a jurisdictional requirement because the statute allows for extension based on good cause. However, in the present case, appellant did not show good cause for late service. Thus, the Court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the petition.

Go to article

Mmawc, Llc V. Zion Wood Obi Wan Trust, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 38 (Sep. 5, 2019), John Mccormick-Huhn Sep 2019

Mmawc, Llc V. Zion Wood Obi Wan Trust, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 38 (Sep. 5, 2019), John Mccormick-Huhn

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted NRS § 597.995, which required any agreement containing an arbitration provision to also provide affirmative authorization to the arbitration by the agreement’s parties.

Go to article

Anderson (Arnold) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (Sept. 5, 2019), Alexandra Matloff Sep 2019

Anderson (Arnold) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (Sept. 5, 2019), Alexandra Matloff

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that if a trial court determines by a preponderance of the evidence that a witness is unable to testify because the defendant wrongfully procured the witness’s unavailability and acted with intent to do so, the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception can be applied in order to deny a defendant’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment. The Court also held that in determining whether the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception applies, the trial court must hear the opposing parties’ arguments in the absence of a jury.

Go to article

Demaranville V. Cannon Cochran Mgmt. Serv.’S, Inc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 35 (Sept. 5, 2019), Anya Lester Sep 2019

Demaranville V. Cannon Cochran Mgmt. Serv.’S, Inc., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 35 (Sept. 5, 2019), Anya Lester

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that the last injurious exposure rule determines the liability for occupational disease which is conclusively presumed to have resulted from past employment. Additionally, the Court held that death benefits are based on the employee’s wages earned while working for the employer to which the occupational disease is causally connected.

Go to article

Nevada State Engineer V. Happy Creek, Inc., 375 Nev. Adv. Op 41 (Sep. 12, 2019), Paige Silva Sep 2019

Nevada State Engineer V. Happy Creek, Inc., 375 Nev. Adv. Op 41 (Sep. 12, 2019), Paige Silva

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In water rights permit cancellation cases, the Nevada courts have long-standing and well-supported authority to grant equitable relief from the new priority date that NRS 533.395 requires the State Engineer to assign.

Go to article

State, Dep’T Of Bus. & Indus. V. Titlemax, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (Sept. 26, 2019), Alexis Taitel Sep 2019

State, Dep’T Of Bus. & Indus. V. Titlemax, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 44 (Sept. 26, 2019), Alexis Taitel

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In an en banc opinion, the Nevada Supreme Court answered whether title lender TitleMax’s Grace Period Deferment Agreement (“GPPDA”), which applied to short-term, high-interest loans offered to Nevada consumers in 2014 and 2015, qualified as a true grace period under NRS 604A.210. The Court concluded that the GPPDA was not a true grace period, but was instead an impermissible extension of the 210-day loans. The Court reasoned that the GPPDA was an extension because TitleMax charged borrowers additional interest during the extended period and thus violated NRS 604A.445, a statute enacted by the Nevada Legislature in part to protect consumers …

Go to article

Pardee Homes Of Nevada V. Wolfram, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (July 3, 2019), Michael Desmond Sep 2019

Pardee Homes Of Nevada V. Wolfram, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 22 (July 3, 2019), Michael Desmond

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) any party seeking attorney fees as special damages must comply with NRCP 9(g), (2) the prevailing party in a two-party breach of contract suit is not entitled to attorney fees as special damages, and (3) any party seeking attorney fees pursuant to express contractual provisions is so entitled upon prevailing in the suit.

Go to article

Azucena V. State Of Nevada, 135 Nev. Ad. Op. (Sep. 5, 2019), Mia Mallette Sep 2019

Azucena V. State Of Nevada, 135 Nev. Ad. Op. (Sep. 5, 2019), Mia Mallette

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that the trial judge’s actions during jury selection rose to the level of judicial misconduct in response to a prospective juror indicating she could not be unbiased. These actions could have impeded Azucena’s right to a fair trial with an impartial jury as the court feared that the potential jurors would not have been able to answer candidly about any biases they may have had.

Go to article

Hager V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (Aug. 29, 2019), Brittney Lehtinen Sep 2019

Hager V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 34 (Aug. 29, 2019), Brittney Lehtinen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) Defendants who successfully complete mental health specialty court diversion programs pursuant to NRS § 176A.250–265 are not “adjudicated mentally ill” under NRS § 202.360(2)(1); and (2) that the jury should have been instructed that under NRS § 202.360(1)(d), an “unlawful user” is someone who regularly uses substances over a period of time consistent with their possession of a firearm.

Go to article

Andersen V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (Sept. 12, 2019) (En Banc), Erika Smolyar Sep 2019

Andersen V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 42 (Sept. 12, 2019) (En Banc), Erika Smolyar

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

In light of recent statutes limiting the right to bear arms for people convicted of misdemeanor battery constituting domestic violence, the Court determined that because the Legislature reclassified misdemeanor battery in that context to constitute a serious offense, those convicted of it are entitled to a jury trial.

Go to article

In Re: Discipline Of James Colin, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 43 (Sep. 19, 2019), Jose Tafoya Sep 2019

In Re: Discipline Of James Colin, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 43 (Sep. 19, 2019), Jose Tafoya

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court found James Colin made statements he knew were false or with reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge. Colin also engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. The court suspended him for six months and one day.

Go to article

Patush V. Las Vegas Bistro, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (Sep. 26, 2019), Katrina Weil Sep 2019

Patush V. Las Vegas Bistro, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (Sep. 26, 2019), Katrina Weil

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that (1) claims for wrongful termination are subject to the limitations period from NRS § 11.190(4)(e) for injuries or death caused by another person’s wrongful act or neglect; and (2) attorney fees were not warranted under § NRS 18.010(2)(b) as the issue was one of first impression.

Go to article

Sfr Inv.’S Pool 1, Llc V. U.S. Bank Nat’L Ass’N, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (Sept. 26, 2019), Brittni Tanenbaum Sep 2019

Sfr Inv.’S Pool 1, Llc V. U.S. Bank Nat’L Ass’N, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (Sept. 26, 2019), Brittni Tanenbaum

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

When a court grants retroactive annulment for an automatic bankruptcy stay on a property, a sale of the property during the stay will not be set aside, unless it can be shown that fraud, oppression, or unfairness occurred during the sales process.

Go to article

Henry V. Nev. Comm'n On Judicial Discipline, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (Feb. 28, 2019) (En Banc), James Puccinelli Feb 2019

Henry V. Nev. Comm'n On Judicial Discipline, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 5 (Feb. 28, 2019) (En Banc), James Puccinelli

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court held that NRS § 1.428 is constitutional. Thus, hearing masters are subject to the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline’s jurisdiction.

Go to article

Pascua V. Bayview Loan Servicing, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 4 (Feb. 7, 2019), Scott Cooper Feb 2019

Pascua V. Bayview Loan Servicing, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 4 (Feb. 7, 2019), Scott Cooper

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that an individual who has been appointed special administrator of a decedent’s estate is entitled to participate in the Foreclosure Mediation Program if the property is the special administrator’s primary residence, and they retain an ownership interest through intestate succession laws.

Go to article

Bombardier Transp. Usa, Inc. V. Nev. Labor Comm’R; The Int’L Union Of Elevator Constructors; And Clark County, 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 3 (Jan. 17, 2019), Amanda Stafford Jan 2019

Bombardier Transp. Usa, Inc. V. Nev. Labor Comm’R; The Int’L Union Of Elevator Constructors; And Clark County, 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 3 (Jan. 17, 2019), Amanda Stafford

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court found Nevada’s wage law requirement for a “public work” applies to construction of the airport shuttle system. The Labor Commissioner did qualify the work as a “public work” because it is repair work and found that twenty percent of the work involved repair rather than maintenance so NRS § 338.010(15) does apply.

Go to article

Franks (Kenneth) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 1 (Jan. 3, 2019), Scott Whitworth Jan 2019

Franks (Kenneth) V. State, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 1 (Jan. 3, 2019), Scott Whitworth

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court reviewed whether a district court’s decision to allow the State to introduce prior incidents of uncharged sexual acts as evidence of the defendant’s propensity for committing sexual offenses violated NRS 48.045(3) and concluded such evidence as long as it is first evaluated for relevance and its heightened risk of unfair prejudice.

Go to article

Coker V. Sassone, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 3, 2019), Whitney Jones Jan 2019

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.

Go to article

First Prev