Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Kar V. Kar, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 63 (August 12, 2016), Briana Martinez
Kar V. Kar, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 63 (August 12, 2016), Briana Martinez
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order denying a motion to modify child custody and support. The Court held that the district court lost exclusive, continuing jurisdiction when the parents and child left Nevada. However, this did not end the jurisdictional analysis. The district court should have considered whether it retained jurisdiction under NRS 125.315(2) and NRS 125.305.
Harrison V. Harrison, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 56 (Jul. 28, 2016), Douglas H. Smith
Harrison V. Harrison, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 56 (Jul. 28, 2016), Douglas H. Smith
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that a district court’s written order concerning the custody of two minor children did not violate public policy when its stipulations provided (1) that it was within the discretion of each minor child, after reaching the age of 14, to decide how much time to spend with either of their divorced parents as long as the original arrangement for joint physical custody remained intact, and (2) that a “parent coordinator” would be appointed to resolve disputes and whose role could be defined by a written district court order. Three justices dissented that the first provision encroaches on …
Valdez V. Aguilar, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (May 26, 2016), Kory Koerperich
Valdez V. Aguilar, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (May 26, 2016), Kory Koerperich
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that NRS 425.360(4) does not exempt a noncustodial parent, who receives public assistance, from a court-ordered child support obligation to the custodial parent of their child. NRS 425.360(4) only exempts a parent from a debt for support owed to the Division of Welfare and Supportive Services.
Manuela H. V. The Eight Judicial District Court Of Nevada, In And For The County Of Clark; And The Honorable Robert Teuton And The State Of Nevada, 132 Nev., Adv. Op. 1 (Jan 7, 2016), Audra Powell
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The court held that in an abuse and neglect case, when the district court establishes a case plan which includes an action step not related to a specific allegation in the abuse and neglect petition, the court must make “specific factual findings that justify the action step with which the parent must comply.” In the present case, the district court did not make such findings as to its requirement that petitioner, Manuela H., submit to drug testing, thus the supreme court granted her petition for a writ of mandamus challenging the district court’s order.
In Re Parental Rights As To A.P.M., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 66 (Sept. 10, 2015), Douglas H. Smith
In Re Parental Rights As To A.P.M., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 66 (Sept. 10, 2015), Douglas H. Smith
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
On appeal from an order for termination of parental rights, the Nevada Supreme Court held, by a vote of 4-2, that (1) the district court may terminate parental rights notwithstanding a completed case plan for reunification if the decision is otherwise warranted under NRS §128.105; that (2) the court need not wait a full 20 months to apply the statutory presumptions of NRS §128.109(1)(a) and NRS §128.109(2) if a child has been removed from his or her parents’ home pursuant to Chapter 32B for at least 14 months of any consecutive 20-month period; and that (3) upon application of these …
Summary Of Beau Davis V. Andrea Ewalefo, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (July 02, 2015), Daven Cameron
Summary Of Beau Davis V. Andrea Ewalefo, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (July 02, 2015), Daven Cameron
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
On appeal from a child custody decree, the Court found the District Court did not have specific findings of fact to support the restriction of travel and visitation outside of the United States and its territories. The Court granted en banc reconsideration, reversed and remanded the case for further fact finding considerations concerning whether the minor child can safely travel overseas for parental visitation.
Summary Of Jennifer L. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 30 (Jun. 04, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Summary Of Jennifer L. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 30 (Jun. 04, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that, although a legal guardianship had been established, and a parent had neither legal nor physical custody of a child, parents are not relived of their parental duties to provide for the care, support, or maintenance of the child.