Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Okada V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 11, 2018) (En Banc), Paloma Guerrero
Okada V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 2 (Jan. 11, 2018) (En Banc), Paloma Guerrero
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that application of NRS § 463.120(6), as enacted in 2017 through Senate Bill 376, which protects certain information and data provided to the gaming authorities, does not apply to information requested before the effective date of the statute. From the plain language of the act that the privilege applies to “any request made on or after the effective date of this act,” the Court concluded that the privilege applies prospectively only and does not apply to any request made before the effective date of this act.
Slade V. Caesars Entm’T Corp, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 36 (May 12, 2016), Katherine Maher
Slade V. Caesars Entm’T Corp, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 36 (May 12, 2016), Katherine Maher
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court generally upheld the common-law principles, referenced in NRS 463.0129(3)(a), permitting gaming establishments to exclude any persons from their premises for any reason, unless for discriminatory or otherwise unlawful purposes. Thus the district court properly dismissed the complaint.