Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Constitutional law (2)
- Employment law (2)
- Minimum Wage Amendment (2)
- Minimum wage amendment (2)
- WORKERS’ COMPENSATION (2)
-
- 1990 Uniformed Controlled Substances Act (1)
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: CONCURRENT WAGES IN WORKERS' COMPENSATION CALCUATION (1)
- Agreements (1)
- Arbitration (1)
- Attorney's Fees (1)
- CIVIL APPEAL: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY (1)
- Class Action (1)
- Class Certification (1)
- Collective Bargaining (1)
- Contracts (1)
- DISABILITY FOR SELF-EMPLOYED WORKERS (1)
- Drug use (1)
- EMPLOYMENT LAW: WAGE LAW REQUIREMENTS (1)
- EMPLOYMENT LAW: WAGES (1)
- ERISA (1)
- Economic Realities Test (1)
- Employment Law (1)
- FLSA (1)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (1)
- Fair Representation (1)
- Independent contractor liability (1)
- Limitations Period (1)
- MISCONDUCT (1)
- NEV. REV. STAT. § 453.3363 (1)
- NLRA (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 41
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Original Roofing Co., Llc V. Chief Admin. Officer Of The Occupational Safety And Health Admin., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Jun. 6, 2019), Riley Coggins
The Original Roofing Co., Llc V. Chief Admin. Officer Of The Occupational Safety And Health Admin., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Jun. 6, 2019), Riley Coggins
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that supervisors’ knowledge that their own conduct, or that of an employee under their supervision, violates NOSHA safety laws cannot be attributed to the employer unless the impermissible actions were foreseeable.
City Of Mesquite V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 33, Dylan Lawter
City Of Mesquite V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 33, Dylan Lawter
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The City of Mesquite asked the Court to determine which statute of limitations (“SOL”) applies to a local government employee's complaint alleging both that the employer breached the collective bargaining agreement and that the union breached its duty of fair representation. The City argued that the claims are subject to a six-month limitations period under Nevada’s Local Government Employee-Management Relations Act (“EMRA”). The Court declined to answer the question. Instead, it clarified that there is no private cause of action to enforce a claim against a union for breach of the duty of fair representation in the first instance. But, …
Patush V. Las Vegas Bistro, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (Sep. 26, 2019), Katrina Weil
Patush V. Las Vegas Bistro, Llc, 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (Sep. 26, 2019), Katrina Weil
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) claims for wrongful termination are subject to the limitations period from NRS § 11.190(4)(e) for injuries or death caused by another person’s wrongful act or neglect; and (2) attorney fees were not warranted under § NRS 18.010(2)(b) as the issue was one of first impression.
Bombardier Transp. Usa, Inc. V. Nev. Labor Comm’R; The Int’L Union Of Elevator Constructors; And Clark County, 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 3 (Jan. 17, 2019), Amanda Stafford
Bombardier Transp. Usa, Inc. V. Nev. Labor Comm’R; The Int’L Union Of Elevator Constructors; And Clark County, 135 Nev., Adv. Op. 3 (Jan. 17, 2019), Amanda Stafford
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court found Nevada’s wage law requirement for a “public work” applies to construction of the airport shuttle system. The Labor Commissioner did qualify the work as a “public work” because it is repair work and found that twenty percent of the work involved repair rather than maintenance so NRS § 338.010(15) does apply.
Mdc Rests. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 76 (May 31, 2018), Jeff Chronister
Mdc Rests. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 76 (May 31, 2018), Jeff Chronister
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Health benefits," as considered by the Minimum Wage Act of the Nevada Constitution, must mean the equivalent of one extra dollar per hour in wages to the employee, but offered in the form of health insurance as opposed to dollar wages.
Dolores V. State, Dep’T Of Employment Sec. Div., 134 Nev. 34 (May 3, 2018), Xheni Ristani
Dolores V. State, Dep’T Of Employment Sec. Div., 134 Nev. 34 (May 3, 2018), Xheni Ristani
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered whether, pursuant to NRS 612.380, an employee that resigns when faced with a resign-or-be-fired option does so voluntarily, and is thereby disqualified from unemployment benefits. The Court determined that where the record shows that the appellant’s decision to resign was freely given and stemming from his own choice, the resignation is voluntary.
Felton V. Douglas County, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 6 (Feb. 15, 2018), Joshua Garry
Felton V. Douglas County, 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 6 (Feb. 15, 2018), Joshua Garry
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that when an uncompensated volunteer, who has concurrent private employment and is injured during the course of volunteer work, shall have their average monthly wage for the purposes of workers’ compensation benefits to be the aggregate of the “deemed wage” provided by statute along with their earnings from the concurrent private employment.
Neville, Jr. Vs. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 7, 2017), Anna Sichting
Neville, Jr. Vs. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 95 (Dec. 7, 2017), Anna Sichting
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court clarified that NRS 608.140 allows for private causes of action for unpaid wages based on the language discussing attorney fees in a private cause of action.
Sargeant V. Henderson Taxi, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (June 1, 2017), Ping Chang
Sargeant V. Henderson Taxi, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (June 1, 2017), Ping Chang
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that (1) a summary judgment is proper when the opposing party did not file a substantive opposition to the motion for summary judgment and (2) a class certification is inappropriate when the plaintiff/appellant did not meet the burden of demonstrating “numerosity, commonality, and typicality,” and the ability to “fairly and adequately” represent the class members when an earlier-filed grievance between the union and taxi company resolved the minimum wage back-pay dispute at issue.
Western Cab Co. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, (Mar. 16, 2017), Sydney Campau
Western Cab Co. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 10, (Mar. 16, 2017), Sydney Campau
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
An employer challenged the validity of Nevada’s Minimum Wage Amendment (MWA). The Court held that (1) the MWA is not preempted by the NLRA, (2) the MWA is not preempted by ERISA, and (3) the MWA is not unconstitutionally vague. The Court declined to address factual issues related to the employer’s wage calculations.
Mdc Rests. V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 76 (Oct. 27, 2016), Alysa Grimes
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.
Perry V. Terrible Herbst, Inc., Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (Oct. 27, 2016), Wesley Lemay Jr.
Perry V. Terrible Herbst, Inc., Nev. Adv. Op. 75 (Oct. 27, 2016), Wesley Lemay Jr.
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Minimum Wage Amendment (MWA) of the Nevada Constitution does not have a specific statute of limitations provision. Because the MWA is closely analogous to recovery for back pay under NRS 608.260, the two-year statute of limitations provision in NRS 608.260 applies, and not the catch-all four-year period from NRS 11.220.
Goodwin V. Jones, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (Mar. 03, 2016), Rob Schmidt
Goodwin V. Jones, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 12 (Mar. 03, 2016), Rob Schmidt
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court of Appeals held that because the employee did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate she made a reasonable, good-faith attempt to maintain her certification, the employee’s failure to maintain certification required by her employer constituted misconduct within the meaning of NRS 612.385.
Mika V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sep. 24, 2015), Kory Koerperich
Mika V. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 71 (Sep. 24, 2015), Kory Koerperich
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The court denied extraordinary writ relief from the district court’s decision to compel arbitration between Petitioners and their employer based on a long-form arbitration agreement signed only by the Petitioners, and federal law favoring arbitration agreements.
Mensah V. Corevel Corp., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 60 (Aug. 06, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Mensah V. Corevel Corp., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 60 (Aug. 06, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held self-employed workers may still be entitled to temporary disability and the employee’s lost wages should be calculated by considering business income and losses and not strictly evidence of a traditional salary
Summary Of D&D Tire, Inc., V. Ouellette, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (Jul. 02, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Summary Of D&D Tire, Inc., V. Ouellette, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (Jul. 02, 2015), Jaymes Orr
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court held that a subcontractor or independent contractor is not immune to liability for workplace injuries if the work being performed is a specialized repair. Ouellette was injured by an employee of Purcell while performing a task that would not be considered a specialized repair. The employee, however, was only present on the job site because of a specialized repair. The Court, however, held that the activity leading to the injury must be considered in context and the employee would not have been present but for the repair.
Summary Of Ndoc V York Claims Serv., Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 25 (May 07, 2015), Janine Lee
Summary Of Ndoc V York Claims Serv., Inc., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 25 (May 07, 2015), Janine Lee
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
NRS 616B.028(1) entitles “[a]ny offender confined at the state prison, while engaged in work in a prison industry or work program” to coverage under the modified program of industrial insurance adopted by the Nevada Division of Insurance. The term “work program” in NRS 616B.028(1) does not apply to individuals who are participating in a work release program.
Summary Of Hohenstein V. State Emp’T Sec. Div., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2015), Walter Fick
Summary Of Hohenstein V. State Emp’T Sec. Div., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 17 (Apr. 2, 2015), Walter Fick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined that NRS 453.3363 prevents the Nevada Employment Security Division from using a guilty plea for a first-time drug offense, which led to a suspended sentence pending completion of probation, to justify denying unemployment benefits on the grounds of misconduct.
Summary Of City Of Reno V. Int’L Ass’N Of Firefighters, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 100, Scott Lundy
Summary Of City Of Reno V. Int’L Ass’N Of Firefighters, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 100, Scott Lundy
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court concluded that the International Association of Firefighters’ (IAFF) grievance was not arbitrable under the parties’ collective bargaining agreement (CBA) because the CBA explicitly stated the City of Reno’s statutory right to lay off any employee due to a lack of funds. Thus, the district court did not have authority under NRS Chapter 38 to grant injunctive relief.
Summary Of Terry V. Sapphire Gentlemen’S Club, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 87, Walter Fick
Summary Of Terry V. Sapphire Gentlemen’S Club, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 87, Walter Fick
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court adopted the “economic realities” test of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and held as a matter of law that performers at the Sapphire Gentlemen’s Club were “employees within the meaning of NRS 608.010, and thus entitled to the minimum wages guaranteed by NRS Chapter 608.”
Summary Of Taylor V. Nev. Dept. Of Health And Human Servs., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 99, Whitney E. Short
Summary Of Taylor V. Nev. Dept. Of Health And Human Servs., 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 99, Whitney E. Short
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined one issue: whether it is within a hearing officer’s duty to determine the appropriate level of discipline and impose that determination.
Wynn Las Vegas, L.L.C. V. Baldonado, Nevada Law Journal
Wynn Las Vegas, L.L.C. V. Baldonado, Nevada Law Journal
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court determined one issue: whether Nevada law (NRS Chapter 608) allows employers to require employees to pool their tips with other employees of a different rank.
Summary Of Williams V. United Parcel Services, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41, Drew Wheaton
Summary Of Williams V. United Parcel Services, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41, Drew Wheaton
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered when an employee, who seeks to reopen a workers’ compensation claim that has been closed for over a year, is deemed to have been “off work” under NRS 616C.390(5).
Summary Of City Of Las Vegas V. Evans, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 31, Timothy A. Wiseman
Summary Of City Of Las Vegas V. Evans, 129 Nev. Adv. Op. 31, Timothy A. Wiseman
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The court considered whether a firefighter who does not qualify for a presumption that his cancer is a compensable occupational disease may still seek to prove it is a compensable occupational disease without the benefit of the presumption. The court also considered whether the appeals officer erred in awarding benefits in this case for a firefighter’s cancer.
Summary Of Sierra Nevada Administrators V. Negriev, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 45, Drew Wheaton
Summary Of Sierra Nevada Administrators V. Negriev, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 45, Drew Wheaton
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review in a workers’ compensation action.
Summary Of Holiday Retirement Corp. V. State, Dir, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Jason L. Deforest
Summary Of Holiday Retirement Corp. V. State, Dir, 128 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 13, Jason L. Deforest
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considered an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review in a worker’s compensation action.
Summary Of Public Agency Compensation Trust V. Blake, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 77, Tim Mott
Summary Of Public Agency Compensation Trust V. Blake, 127 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 77, Tim Mott
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
The Court considers an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review in a workers’ compensation action.
Summary Of Ozawa V. Vision Airlines, Inc., 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 16, Nick Portz
Summary Of Ozawa V. Vision Airlines, Inc., 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 16, Nick Portz
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Consolidated appeals considering two issues: (1) whether to recognize a new exception to the at-will employment doctrine and to allow a claim for tortious discharge related to an employee’s termination for attempting to organize his fellow employees; and (2) whether the district court abused its discretion in its resolution of respondents’ request for attorney fees and costs.
Summary Of Hd Supply Facilities Maint. V. Bymoen, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 20, Casey G. Perkins
Summary Of Hd Supply Facilities Maint. V. Bymoen, 125 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 20, Casey G. Perkins
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
Certified questions from the United States District Court, District of Nevada, arising from a action by HD Supply Facilities Maint., Ltd. (“HDS”), seeking enforcement of restrictive employment covenants against its former employee, Leif Bymoen (“Bymoen”) and Bymoen’s current employer AZ Partsmaster, Inc. (“AZP”). The questions each relate to whether the Nevada rule, set forth by the Nevada Supreme Court in Traffic Control Servs. v. United Rentals,2 prohibiting the assignment of noncompetition covenants in asset purchase transactions “applies when a successor corporation acquires covenants of noncompetition, nonsolicitation, or confidentiality as a result of a merger.”
Summary Of International Game Tech., Inc. V. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 18, Krystal Gallagher
Summary Of International Game Tech., Inc. V. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 18, Krystal Gallagher
Nevada Supreme Court Summaries
This opinion rejects International Game Technology’s (hereinafter “IGT”) challenge to the district court’s denial of their motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Nevada False Claims Act’s anti-retaliation provisions (hereinafter “FCA”). The Court also clarifies the meaning of the statute at issue, NRS 357.250.