Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- BUSINESS LAW (2)
- Business (2)
- Business Law (2)
- ALTER EGO DOCTRINE; LLC LIABILITY (1)
- Adam Wynott (1)
-
- Attorney-client privilege (1)
- Auerbach Test (1)
- Bankruptcy (1)
- Business Organization (1)
- Cay Club (1)
- Civil (1)
- Collective corporate client (1)
- Derivative Claim (1)
- Direct Harm Test (1)
- Enforcement (1)
- Entity is the client (1)
- Exculpatory Provisions (1)
- Fiduciary Duty (1)
- Joint client (1)
- Limited Liability Corporation (1)
- Member Liability (1)
- NRS 87.160 (1)
- Partnership-by-estoppel (1)
- Privileged documents (1)
- Refinancing loan (1)
- Shareholder Claims (1)
- Special Litigation Committee (1)
- Statutory Interpretation (1)
- WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS (1)
Articles 1 - 20 of 20
Full-Text Articles in Law
Chur V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 7 (Feb. 27, 2020), Dylan Lawter
Chur V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 136 Nev. Adv. Op. 7 (Feb. 27, 2020), Dylan Lawter
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Former directors of Lewis & Clark LTC Risk Retention Group, Inc. filed a writ of mandamus in the Nevada Supreme Court, seeking (1) direction concerning the district court’s application of Shoen v. SAC Holding Corp. and (2) relief from that court’s judgment. The directors asserted that gross negligence does not support a viable claim for personal liability under the NRS 78.138. The Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Nevada maintained that gross negligence is an appropriate claim against directors under Shoen. The Court elected to consider the director’s petition for a writ of mandamus, clarified the language in …
State, Dep’T Of Bus. V. Dollar Loan Ctr., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (Mar. 1, 2018) (En Banc), Shady Sirsy
State, Dep’T Of Bus. V. Dollar Loan Ctr., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (Mar. 1, 2018) (En Banc), Shady Sirsy
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Nevada Supreme Court determined that NRS 604A.480(2)(f) bars a licensee from bringing any type of enforcement action on a refinancing loan made under NRS 604A.480(2) and is not merely a condition precedent to making a refinancing loan under the subsection.
Gardner Ex Rel. V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 89 (Nov. 22, 2017), Will Carter
Gardner Ex Rel. V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 89 (Nov. 22, 2017), Will Carter
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The alter ego doctrine applies to LLCs and corporations, such that creditors may reach manager’s assets. The Court held that an LLC does not protect a manager or member from their own individual acts of negligence. Therefore, the Court directed the district court to vacate because, “the varieties of fraud and injustice that the alter ego doctrine was designed to redress can be equally exploited through limited liability companies.”
Parametric Sound Corp. V. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (Sep. 14, 2017), Lucy Crow
Parametric Sound Corp. V. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 59 (Sep. 14, 2017), Lucy Crow
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court clarified its holding in Cohen v. Mirage Resorts, Inc. by adopting the Delaware direct harm test to determine whether a shareholder’s claim is direct or derivative. Under the direct harm test, the Court asks (1) who suffered alleged harm, and (2) who would receive benefit from recovery or another remedy? If the shareholder cannot establish a claim without showing injury to the corporation, the shareholder’s claim fails.
In Re Dish Network Derivation Litig., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 61 (Sept. 14, 2017), Joseph K. Fabbi
In Re Dish Network Derivation Litig., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 61 (Sept. 14, 2017), Joseph K. Fabbi
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that the Auerbach test should be applied when a Special Litigation Committee (SLC) files a motion to defer a derivative claim. A derivative claim is dismissible if the SLC was independent and conducted a good faith investigation when it concluded litigation would not be in the company’s best interest.
Gardner V. Henderson Water Park, L.L.C., 133 Nev. Ad. Op. 54 (Aug. 3, 2017), Scott Cardenas
Gardner V. Henderson Water Park, L.L.C., 133 Nev. Ad. Op. 54 (Aug. 3, 2017), Scott Cardenas
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Under NRS 86.371 and NRS 86.381, an LLC member is not responsible for the LLC’s liabilities solely because it is a member.
Poremba V. S. Nev. Paving; And S&C Claims Servs., Inc. 132 Nev. Ad. Op. 24 (April 7, 2016), Baylie Hellman
Poremba V. S. Nev. Paving; And S&C Claims Servs., Inc. 132 Nev. Ad. Op. 24 (April 7, 2016), Baylie Hellman
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considers an appeal from a district court order. The Court clarified that medical treatment is not the only expense on which a workers’ compensation claimant is permitted to exhaust his or her settlement funds. Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Becker V. Becker, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Oct. 29, 2015), Paul George
Becker V. Becker, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 85 (Oct. 29, 2015), Paul George
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
In response to a certified question by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada, the Court concluded that under NRS 21.090(1)(bb) a debtor can exempt his stock in the corporations described in NRS 78.746(2), but his economic interest in that stock is still subject to the charging order remedy in NRS 78.746(1).
Summary Of In Re: Cay Clubs, 130 Nev., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 92, Adam Wynott
Summary Of In Re: Cay Clubs, 130 Nev., 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 92, Adam Wynott
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court concluded that NRS 87.160(1) may impose partnership liability on a joint venture based on the partnership-by-estoppel doctrine and that the statute may apply to any claim that relies on the doctrine’s element of reasonable reliance. The Court clarified the statute’s meaning, stating that a partnership by estoppel requires (1) consent, manifested expressly or impliedly from the liable party’s conduct; (2) credit, not limited to financial credit, given by one party to the other; (3) and reasonable reliance by one party on the other party’s representation of a partnership or joint venture.
Summary Of Las Vegas Sands Corp. V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 69, Michael Bowman
Summary Of Las Vegas Sands Corp. V. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 69, Michael Bowman
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined whether a former CEO is within a “class of persons” allowed to use the corporation’s privileged documents in litigation against the corporation.
Summary Of Weddell V. H2o, Inc., 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 9, Matthew Vantusko
Summary Of Weddell V. H2o, Inc., 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 9, Matthew Vantusko
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from an action seeking contract, tort, and declaratory relief.
Summary Of Canarelli V. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 72, Cameron Daw
Summary Of Canarelli V. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. 72, Cameron Daw
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
A petition for a writ of certiorari or mandamus challenging the district court’s order to force Petitioner to serve as trustee for a dissolved corporation in a construction defect action.
Summary Of Smith V. Kisorin Usa, Inc., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 37, Cayla Witty
Summary Of Smith V. Kisorin Usa, Inc., 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 37, Cayla Witty
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
An appeal of a district court summary judgment challenging whether a corporation’s decision to deliver dissenters’ rights notice to all stockholders that hold stock in street name and not to all beneficial stockholders is sufficient under NRS Chapter 92A.
Summary Of In Re Amerco Derivative Litigation, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 17, Jennifer Delcarmen
Summary Of In Re Amerco Derivative Litigation, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 17, Jennifer Delcarmen
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
An appeal from an order to dismiss a shareholder derivative claim.
Summary Of American Ethanol V. Cordillera Fund, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Michael Roche
Summary Of American Ethanol V. Cordillera Fund, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Michael Roche
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court reviews an appeal from a district court decision in a corporation action.
Summary Of Hartford Fire Ins. Co.; Hartford Accident & Indem. Co.; & Richardson Constr., Inc. V. Tr. Of The Const. Indus. & Laborers Health & Welfare Trust; Tr. Of The Constr. Indus. & Laborers Joint Pension Trust; & Tr. Of The Constr. Indus. & Laborers Vacation Tru, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 16, Elham Roohani
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Acceptance of the Ninth Circuit’s two certified questions: whether trustees must provide notice to recover on (1) payment bonds against surety and (2) against the general contractor.
Summary Of Nevada Classified Sch. Emp. Ass’N V. Quaglia, 124 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 6, Emily Reed
Summary Of Nevada Classified Sch. Emp. Ass’N V. Quaglia, 124 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 6, Emily Reed
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Appellant is Nevada Classified School Employees Association (NCSEA). NCSEA is a non profit corporation with multiple chapters whose members are Nevada public school district employees. NCSEA is governed by its articles of incorporation and bylaws. The articles of incorporation require each member have equal voting power. “[T]he bylaws state that ‘each Chapter shall be entitled to one (1) Delegate for every fifty (50) members or part thereof, with a maximum of seven (7) Delegates.’”2 In 2003, at the annual delegate conference, the NCSEA passed an amendment to article III, section 3 of the bylaws. Prior to the amendment, section three …
Summary Of Nanopierce Tech. V. Depository Trust, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 38, Jamie Zimmerman
Summary Of Nanopierce Tech. V. Depository Trust, 123 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 38, Jamie Zimmerman
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Appeal from a district court order dismissing a securities fraud action.
Summary Of Redl V. Secretary Of State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 13, Mike Feliciano
Summary Of Redl V. Secretary Of State, 120 Nev. Adv. Rep. 13, Mike Feliciano
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Petition denied. Under NRS 78.730, the Secretary of State has discretion to revive a corporate charter that has been revoked for a period of five or more years.
Summary Of Nittinger V. Holman, Cami Perkins
Summary Of Nittinger V. Holman, Cami Perkins
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Respondents, Dedric Holman and Christina Edwards, were gambling at the Gold Coast Hotel when a physical confrontation arose between John Nittinger, a security guard, and Holman. When Holman tried to run, security officers pursued him and held him to the ground. According to Holman’s testimony, the guards made racial slurs, punched, kicked and beat him. The security shift supervisor was present during part of the incident. The district court instructed the jury that it could find the Gold Coast liable for punitive damages if a “managerial agent” authorized or ratified the guards’ conduct. The jury awarded respondents $198,000 in compensatory …