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

Law Commons

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

University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Statutory interpretation

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Dezzani V. Kern & Assocs. Ltd., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 9 (Mar. 1, 2018), Ronald Evans Mar 2018

Dezzani V. Kern & Assocs. Ltd., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 9 (Mar. 1, 2018), Ronald Evans

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court determined that attorneys do not qualify as agents for the purposes of retaliatory action under NRS 116.31183 where the attorney is providing legal service for a homeowners’ association. The Court further held that an attorney litigating pro se or representing his or her law firm may not collect attorney fees but may collect attorney costs.


Simmons V. Briones, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 9, Annie Avery Mar 2017

Simmons V. Briones, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 9, Annie Avery

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

A judgment for penalty attorney fees and costs against a driver in an action that arises out of a motor vehicle accident is not a “judgment . . . upon a cause of action” arising out of the use of a motor vehicle such that its nonpayment may result in the suspension of driving privileges under NRS § 485.302.


Mdc Rests. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (Oct. 27, 2016), Alysa Grimes Oct 2016

Mdc Rests. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (Oct. 27, 2016), Alysa Grimes

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

To “provide” health benefits under the Minimum Wage Amendment, an employer need only offer to employees (rather than enroll them in) a qualifying health benefit plan. Tips are not included in an employee’s gross taxable income for calculating maximum health benefit plan premiums.


In Re P.S., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 24, 2015), Rob Schmidt Dec 2015

In Re P.S., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 24, 2015), Rob Schmidt

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Supreme Court of Nevada held that under NRS § 62B.030 the district court has discretion over whether to conduct a hearing de novo after reviewing the recommendations of a master of the juvenile court when timely requested.