Law Commons^™

Summary Of Hsu V. County Of Clark, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 60, Diane L. Welch

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This case is an appeal from a district court order, entered on remand, dismissing an inverse condemnation action. While the current appeal was pending, the Nevada Supreme Court decided an intervening case with substantively similar facts which changed Nevada law when analyzing airspace takings.

Summary Of Sfpp, L.P. V. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 56, Jared Christensen

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal for writ of prohibition to determine if a district court can retain jurisdiction over disputes from a settlement agreement between parties, after the district court previously dismissed the case with prejudice.ve-flas

Petitioner's Observations (December 2007) For The Redress Of Violations Of Human Rights Guaranteed By The American Declaration Of The Rights And Duties Of Man, Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Leven V. Frey, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 40, William Miller

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

This appeal clarifies the procedure and standard for judgment renewal, under NRS 17.214. The Nevada Supreme Court held that an individual must show timely filing of an affidavit, timely recording of the affidavit (if the judgment to be renewed was recorded), and timely service of the affidavit. Furthermore, the statutory language requires strict compliance.

Summary Of Arnold V. Kip, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41, Barbara Mcdonald

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. V. Richardson Constr., 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 39, Danielle Tarmu

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal from judgment awarding $225,000 to Richardson Construction and order imposing sanctions upon Clark County School District (hereinafter “CCSD”).

Summary Judgment In Florida: The Road Less Traveled, Leonard Pertnoy

Faculty Articles

This article will first explore the origins of summary judgment in the Florida courts. Next, the Holl v. Talcot standard (the "Holl standard") shall be discussed. The discussion then turns to arguments in favor of maintaining the Holl standard, including the great costs which arise by the application of the standard, and ultimately, a discussion debunking those arguments. Finally, partial summary judgment shall be discussed, introducing its potential to assist the practitioner in achieving, in part, progress towards a more predictable and useful summary judgment process.

The Logic Of Legal Remedies And The Relative Weight Of Norms: Assessing The Public Interest In The Tort Reform Debate, Irma S. Russell

Faculty Works

This article explores the background principles of consistency and proportionality in legal rules and remedies. It identifies the relative strength of the interests of individuals and the public as the key to justifying the remedies available in different areas of law. Understanding the normative guidance of particular legal rules reveals the strength of society's judgment of the interests at stake in different remedies. For example, the principle of consistency generally means that a legal doctrine applying an objective measure of one's interest must apply a like-kind measure to all interests considered, absent some explicit and justifiable basis for different formulations. …

From Federalism To Intersystemic Governance: The Changing Nature Of Modern Jurisdiction, Robert B. Ahdieh

Faculty Scholarship

At heart, this introductory essay aspires to encourage scholars who write in widely divergent areas, yet share a focus on the changing nature of jurisdiction, to engage one another more closely. From Jackson's study of "convergence, resistance, and engagement" among courts, Kingsbury's study of "global administrative law," and Bermann's analysis of "transatlantic regulatory cooperation," to Resnik's evaluation of "trans-local networks," Weiser's account of "cooperative federalism" in telecommunications law, and Thompson's concept of "collaborative corporate governance," a related set of questions is ultimately at stake: How ought we understand the reach of any given decision-maker's jurisdiction? What are the implications of …

Summary Of Caballero V. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 34, Jerald Van Rhyn

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Petitioner Caballero didn’t speak English and wanted an interpreter for his small claims proceedings. The justice court denied his request on the ground that he wasn’t disabled under NRS 50.050.2 The Supreme Court held that the justice court had an inherent power to allow a volunteer interpreter or appoint one in the alternative if justice demands it. Further, the Supreme Court held that the justice court had an express power of appointment under JCRCP 43(f).3 The Supreme Court therefore issued a write of mandamus ordering the district court’s order vacated and remanding the issue to justice court for consideration.

Legal Methods As A Point Of Reference For Comparative Studies Of Procedural Law, James Maxeiner

All Faculty Scholarship

This paper addresses the importance of comparative legal methods for study of comparative procedure.

9th Annual Open Government Summit: The Access To Public Records Act & The Open Meetings Act, 2007, Department Of Attorney General, State Of Rhode Island

School of Law Conferences, Lectures & Events

No abstract provided.

Summary Of Marcuse V. Del Webb Communities, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 30, Jeremy K. Cooper

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appeal of a district court’s dismissal of a construction defect class action. Also, appeal from a district court’s denial of appellants’ motion to consolidate their claim and their motion for a separate trial within a class action (first action) and appeal from a district court’s order granting respondent’s motion to dismiss appellant’s pursuit of a second action independent from the class action under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel (second action). The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the class action based on the settlement and reversed the district court’s order granting respondent’s motion to …

Summary Of Nelson V. Heer, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 26, Shauna Welsh

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Review of district court’s order denying a motion for judgment as a matter of law based on the statutory interpretation of N.R.S. Chapter 113, which governs the sale of real property.

Rule 68 Offers Of Judgment: The Practices And Opinions Of Experienced Civil Rights And Employment Discrimination Attorneys, Thomas A. Eaton

Popular Media

Hosch Professor Tom Eaton shares the results of a survey, conducted with Mercer University's George Professor Harold Lewis, on the use of Federal Rule 68 Offers of Judgment.

Summary Of Callie V. Bowling, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 22, Bret Meich

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The court considered whether a judgment creditor in a domesticated foreign judgment may add a nonparty to a final judgment, under the alter ego doctrine, simply by moving to amend the judgment. The court held that such a procedure violates the due process rights of the nonparty whom the creditor seeks to add. To observe the requisite attributes of due process, a judgment creditor who wishes to assert an alter ego claim must do so in an independent action against the alleged alter ego.

Summary Of Schmidt V. Washoe County, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 16, Matthew H. Engle

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Gary R. Schmidt raised six alleging violation of Nevada’s Open Meeting Law, NRS § 241 et seq. The first four stemmed from a Washoe County Board of Commissioners (“WCBC”) meeting on January 11, 2005. First, that the WCBC violated the Open Meeting Law by “pulling” a lobbying contract from its agenda. Second, that WCBC violated the law when it allegedly deliberated on whether to remove the lobbying contract item from its agenda. Third, that WCBC improperly reduced his allotment of time to speak on the lobbying contract. Fourth, that WCBC improperly refused to read into the record letters written by …

Summary Of Edwards V. Ghandour, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 14, Jennifer Arias

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

On October 22, 1998, Edwards and two of his business partners filed their original complaint. In the complaint, Edwards and his partners alleged they were fraudulently induced into leasing restaurant space and brought claims against eleven defendants. While counsel initially represented Edwards and his partners, the lawyer was forced to withdraw, after being disbarred. In his amended complaint, Edwards, who was not authorized to practice law, named, on their behalf, both business partners. In fact, Edwards named one partner who wished to be removed. The district court ruled that the amended complaint would relate solely to Edwards and removed the …

Summary Of Monroe V. Columbia Sunrise Hospital And Medical Center, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 13, Ryan Andrus

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Monroe appeals from the Eighth Judicial District Court’s grant of dismissal pursuant to NRCP 41(e). Monroe brought claims on behalf of herself and her son James.

Summary Of Francesca Bero-Wachs V. The Law Office Of Logar And Pulver, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, Judy Carol Cox

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Appellant Bero-Wachs appeals from a district court order upholding her attorney’s lien which attached her IRA accounts and included accountant fees. Respondent Lograr petitions for a writ of mandamus, seeking a declaration that Bero-Wachs’ alimony award is attachable to his attorney’s lien.

Venue In Missouri After Tort Reform, David J. Achtenberg

Faculty Works

Venue matters. Anyone who doubts it need only look to the venue wars waged in the Missouri Supreme Court during the last decades. Understandably, plaintiffs prefer unrestrictive venue rules so that they can file and try their cases in counties with plaintiff-friendly jury pools. Just as understandably, defendants prefer rules that restrict plaintiffs' ability to choose between multiple venues and, to the extent possible, rules that permit the defendant to select the counties in which they can be forced to defend their actions.

The passage of Missouri's 2005 Tort Reform Act represented an important legislative victory for defendants in this …

The Internationalization Of Lay Legal Decision-Making: Jury Resurgence And Jury Research, Richard O. Lempert

Articles

When I first began to study the jury more than thirty years ago, the topic of this Journal issue, jury systems around the world, was unthinkable. The use of juries, especially in civil litigation, had long been in decline, to the point of near extinction in England, the land of their birth, and the live question was whether the jury system would endure in the United States. It seemed clear that juries would not continue in their classic form, as many U.S. states, with the Supreme Court's eventual approval, mandated juries of less than twelve people and allowed verdicts to …

What Is The Definition Of An "Organ" Under The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act?, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

Did the court of appeals have jurisdiction to review the district court's remand order, notwithstanding 28 U.S.C. 1447(d)?

does a company wholly owned by a Canadian crown corporation -- that is itself wholly owned by the Canadian Province of British Columbia and that performs obligations and exercises rights of the Province pursuant to a treaty with the United States -- quality as an "organ" of a foreign state or political subdivision under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act?

Foreigners' Fate In America's Courts: Empirical Legal Research, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This article revisits the controversy regarding how foreigners fare in U.S. courts. The available data, if taken in a sufficiently big sample from numerous case categories and a range of years, indicate that foreigners have fared better in the federal courts than their domestic counterparts have fared. Thus, the data offer no support for the existence of xenophobic bias in U.S. courts. Nor do they establish xenophilia, of course. What the data do show is that case selection drives the outcomes for foreigners. Foreigners’ aversion to U.S. forums can elevate the foreigners’ success rates, when measured as a percentage of …

Petitioner's Observations (February 2007) For The Redress Of Violations Of Human Rights Guaranteed By The American Declaration Of The Rights And Duties Of Man, Inter-American Commission On Human Rights, Jeffrey C. Tuomala

Faculty Publications and Presentations

No abstract provided.

Case Selection In Three Supreme Courts: A Comparative Perspective, J. Randy Beck, Anna Nagaeva

Popular Media

This paper brings a comparative perspective to an important procedural issue faced in many judicial systems. It examines the exercise of the power of case selection in three supreme courts that have each been given some degree of control over whether to accept particular cases for review. The focus is on two American courts, the Supreme Court of the United States (USSC) and the Supreme Court of Georgia (GASC), as well as one Russian court, the Supreme Arbitrazh (Commercial) Court of the Russian Federation (SACRF).

Ibeto Petrochemical Industries Ltd V. M/T Beffen, 475 F. 3d 56 - Court Of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2007, Roger J. Miner '56

Circuit Court Opinions

Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant Ibeto Petrochemical Industries Limited ("Ibeto") appeals from an Order entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Scheindlin, J.) in an action arising out of the contamination by seawater of a shipment of oil being carried by motor tanker. The Order granted the motions of Defendant-Appellee M/T Beffen, Her Engines, Tackles, Boiler, etc. (in rem) ("the Beffen") and Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee Bryggen Shipping and Trading A/S (in personam) ("Bryggen") (collectively "defendants") to stay this action, to compel arbitration, and to enjoin an action pending in Nigeria. The Order also denied Ibeto's motion for voluntary …

Discovering Discovery: Non-Party Access To Pretrial Information In The Federal Courts 1938-2006, Seymour Moskowitz

Law Faculty Publications

In the modern era, the pretrial process is critical to the disposition of almost all litigation. The vast majority of cases never go to trial. Those which are contested at trial and upon appeal are often decided upon the results of the information gather before trial. This is true in both private litigation and in public interest cases where "private attorneys general" may only function effectively with court-enforced discovery. Despite the significance of the Article III courts to our society, transparency in their processes for resolving civil disputes has been severely compromised. Threats to openness emanate from multiple sources. This …

Quantum Meruit And The Restatement (Third) Of Restitution And Unjust Enrichment, Candace Kovacic-Fleischer

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

INTRODUCTION: Thirty years ago, Professor Graham Douthwaite said that restitution can "arise in a bedazzling variety of situations."' He also said that practitioners usually are not aware of "the restitutionary implications or potential" of their clients' problems. Over 50 years ago, Professor John Dawson said that "[i]t is doubtful even now whether most lawyers have an adequate conception of the range and resources of the remedy." About twenty years ago, I said of Professor Dawson's statement, "It is doubtful whether the situation has much improved in the last thirty years." Unfortunately, I can still repeat that concern.

Reassessing The Purposes Of Federal Question Jurisdiction, John F. Preis

Law Faculty Publications

For ages, judges and legal academics have claimed that federal question jurisdiction has three purposes: to provide litigants with a judge experienced in federal law, to protect litigants from state court hostility toward federal claims, and to preserve uniformity in federal law. Because federal claims, for the most part, have always been cognizable in state courts, these purposes imply that state courts are less experienced, more hostile, and more likely to adjudicate federal law in ways that decrease the uniformity of federal law. Despite the ongoing allegiance to this conception of federal question jurisdictionand by implication, state court adjudication of …