Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 14 of 14
Full-Text Articles in Law
O'Neal V. Hudson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (June 1, 2017), Kristopher Kalkowski
O'Neal V. Hudson, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (June 1, 2017), Kristopher Kalkowski
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
If a party timely sends a motion for new trial directly to the presiding judge in an email, then that motion is properly filed and will toll the time available to file a notice of appeal so long as: (1) the presiding judge allows the motion to be filed with that judge; and, (2) the presiding judge accepts the motion within the required time-period.
Davidson V. Davidson, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sept. 29, 2016), Hunter Davidson
Davidson V. Davidson, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sept. 29, 2016), Hunter Davidson
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that: (1) the six-year statute of limitations in NRS 11.190(1)(a) applies to claims for enforcement of a property distribution provision in a divorce decree; and (2) the statute of limitations period in an action on a divorce decree commences “from the last transaction or the last item charged or last credit given.”
Hairr V. First Judicial Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 16 (Mar. 10, 2016), Douglas H. Smith
Hairr V. First Judicial Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 16 (Mar. 10, 2016), Douglas H. Smith
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Supreme Court denied petitioners’ application for a writ of mandamus for abuse of the district court’s discretion. If granted, this writ would have compelled the district court to grant the petitioners’ application to intervene under Rule 24 of the Nevada Rule of Civil Procedure as defendants in a constitutional challenge to a program that awards grants to children who are educated by entities other than public schools. The State is presumed to adequately represent the interests of those who support the bill. Since they did not demonstrate a conflict of interest with the State’s position or present an argument …
Mcdonald Carano Wilson, Llp. V. Bourassa Law Group, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 90 (December 3, 2015), Patrick Caddick
Mcdonald Carano Wilson, Llp. V. Bourassa Law Group, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 90 (December 3, 2015), Patrick Caddick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order. The Court reversed and remanded the district court’s ruling that NRS § 18.015 does not allow an attorney to enforce a charging lien when the attorney withdrew from representation.
Michaels V. Pentair Water Pool & Spa, Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Oct. 1, 2015), F. Shane Jackson
Michaels V. Pentair Water Pool & Spa, Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 81 (Oct. 1, 2015), F. Shane Jackson
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court of Appeals considered an appeal from a district court order denying the plaintiff’s post-trial motion for a new trial, which alleged that the defendant’s attorney committed misconduct during closing arguments at trial. The Court held that the district court failed to make the detailed findings required by the Nevada Supreme Court for claims of attorney misconduct and remanded the case for the district court to reconsider the matter and make the necessary findings.
William Nathan Baxter V. Dignity Health, Et Al, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (September 24, 2015), Andrea Orwoll
William Nathan Baxter V. Dignity Health, Et Al, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (September 24, 2015), Andrea Orwoll
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order dismissing a medical malpractice complaint. The Court held that because NRS § 41A.071 creates threshold requirements for bringing medical malpractice suits, it must be construed consistently with the liberal pleading requirements. The Court reversed and remanded.
In Re Guardianship Of N.M., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (September 24, 2015), Daniel Ormsby
In Re Guardianship Of N.M., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (September 24, 2015), Daniel Ormsby
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court heard an appeal from a parent-appellant challenging a district court’s exercise of temporary emergency jurisdiction to appoint a temporary, non-parent, guardian and general, non-parent, guardian. Affirmed.
Bergenfield V. Bac Home Loans Servicing, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sep. 10, 2015), Chelsea Stacey
Bergenfield V. Bac Home Loans Servicing, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 68 (Sep. 10, 2015), Chelsea Stacey
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that when a district court dismisses a complaint but gives the plaintiff leave to amend the order it is not a final appealable judgment. In order for it to be a final appealable judgment, a plaintiff must give the district court written notice within 30 days that the plaintiff will not amend the complaint so the district court may enter a final, appealable order.
Barbara Ann Hollier Trust V. Shack, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (August 6, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Barbara Ann Hollier Trust V. Shack, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (August 6, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
On an issue of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court held that the filing of a post-judgement motion which tolls the time to appeal also tolls NRCP 54(d)(2)(B)’s 20-day deadline to move for attorney fees. The Court further concluded that (a) the $100,000 offset in Hollier’s favor was not extinguished by the Court’s previous order and (b) only Acadian Realty is liable for attorney fees.
Summary Of Biscay V. Mgm Resorts Int’L., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (July 2, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Summary Of Biscay V. Mgm Resorts Int’L., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (July 2, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court concluded dismissal is not proper under NRS 18.130(4) when a non-resident plaintiff files security with the court clerk for the defendant’s costs when the required security is filed any time prior to the action being dismissed.
Summary Of Lisle V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 39 (June 25, 2015), Adam Wynott
Summary Of Lisle V. State, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 39 (June 25, 2015), Adam Wynott
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that the petitions filed by the appellant, Kevin James Lisle (Lisle), were procedurally barred. The Court determined that a petitioner cannot present new evidence of mitigating circumstances in order to prove actual innocence of the death penalty. The Court determined that the claims of Lisle did not warrant relief and upheld the district court ruling.
Summary Of Berry V. Feil, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (June 11, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Summary Of Berry V. Feil, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (June 11, 2015), Patrick Phippen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The exhaustion requirement applies regardless of what court the complaint is filed in, and that a state court has no discretion to stay a § 1983 action to allow for administrative remedies to be pursued.
Summary Of Fulbrook V. Allstate Ins. Co., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 33 (Jun. 4, 2015), Walter Fick
Summary Of Fulbrook V. Allstate Ins. Co., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 33 (Jun. 4, 2015), Walter Fick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that appellant’s counsel’s “technical difficulties,” with regard to e-mails and case files, was an insufficient basis on which to recall remittitur, because the technical difficulties were unrelated to Nevada’s electronic filing system, which exclusively provides required notifications to counsel.
Summary Of Catholic Diocese Of Green Bay, Inc. V. John Doe 119, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (May 28, 2015), Adam Wynott
Summary Of Catholic Diocese Of Green Bay, Inc. V. John Doe 119, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 29 (May 28, 2015), Adam Wynott
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held a plaintiff must prove sufficient contacts with the jurisdiction in order to establish personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Without proof of sufficient contacts, Nevada courts do not have personal jurisdiction over a foreign Catholic diocese. The Court reversed the district court’s decision.