Nevada Supreme Court

The court declined to adopt the mode-of-operation theory of premises liability and held that constructive notice may instead be shown by evidence that the particular hazard or type of risk was reasonably foreseeable.

The court held that a requester’s personal characteristics cannot be considered when applying either NPRA balancing test because both tests assess the public interest in access, not an individual requester’s interest.

The court held that Nevada’s prohibitions on machine guns and semiautomatic firearms modified with an auto-sear do not violate the federal or Nevada constitutional right to bear arms, and that the evidence and challenged trial rulings otherwise supported the convictions.

The court held that Nevada’s graduated-sanctions statutes apply to probation sentences imposed after their effective date, even when the underlying offense occurred earlier. It also held that courts may consider a probationer’s full violation history, including previously resolved nontechnical violations, when…

The court reversed Carvalho’s murder conviction because the district court’s repeated admonitions and instruction prevented the jury from considering her supported theory that her sister may have been the shooter, violating Carvalho’s right to present a complete defense.

The Nevada Supreme Court granted the petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that a temporary restraining order issued with notice is subject to the same 14‑day expiration limit as one issued without notice and that the district court’s indefinite TRO was therefore improper.

For the first time, the Nevada Supreme Court held that a failure-to-appear clause in a guilty plea agreement may not be enforced against a defendant who remains in custody, because the clause's purpose of preventing out-of-custody defendants from absconding is not served and the State retains ultimate control over an…

In an original writ proceeding, the Nevada Supreme Court held that NAC 641.234(3), a Board of Psychological Examiners regulation restricting release of psychological test material, does not supersede a district court's authority to order disclosure of raw psychological test data, including examination questions, in…

The court affirmed judgment on the pleadings for the respondents. It held that the Open Meeting Law requires the Citizen Review Board to include the names of officers whose conduct is under review on public meeting notices and agendas, even when the meetings themselves are closed.

The court held that Nevada's assault statute permits a separate conviction for each person whom the defendant intentionally places in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm.

The court held that the settlement arose from professional-negligence claims because the alleged ordinary-negligence conduct involved medical providers acting within a professional relationship, so the statutory cap on contingent attorney fees applied.

The court held that the population-based provisions of A.B. 519 were unconstitutional and affirmed summary judgment for Elko County. Section 2 was a local or special law because its narrow population range lacked a rational relationship to the statute’s purpose and effectively targeted Elko County, while Sections 2…

The court held that NRCP 12(g)(2) barred the respondent from raising a statutory-standing defense for the first time in a successive motion to dismiss on remand, although a subject-matter-jurisdiction challenge could be raised at any time.

The court held that medical records obtained from an opposing party in discovery may be authenticated under the general authentication provision rather than exclusively through the subpoena procedure for custodians of medical records.

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed Jessica De Falco's convictions for two counts of attempted murder with use of a deadly weapon, two counts of battery with use of a deadly weapon resulting in substantial bodily harm, and duty to stop at the scene of a crash.

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the tort judgment, the denial of a new trial, the expert-fee award, and the assignment of the judgment debtors' insurer claims. It held that the Clarks received a meaningful opportunity to present their defense, that deemed admissions were properly withdrawn, and that the evidence…

The court held that a party may use a second petition for judicial review to challenge jurisdictional defects in an earlier proceeding after remand proceedings conclude. It nevertheless vacated the district court's merits ruling because the second petition failed to name the administrative commission as a respondent…

The court held that the district court abused its discretion by deeming an alternative suspect’s prior, substantially similar sexual assault irrelevant and consequently withholding the suspect’s juvenile records.

The court held that, when private counsel represents a paying client under an agreed hourly-fee arrangement, the actual billing rate is a significant and presumptively appropriate measure of the lodestar rate.

The court held that Yanling was required to disclose a computation of her quantifiable damages under NRCP 16.1 and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that she failed to do so.

The court denied extraordinary writ relief and held that EMS providers are not statutory providers of health care and that ambulances are not clinics under Nevada's professional-negligence statutes.

The Nevada Supreme Court denied Kasie Causey’s petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that the district court properly allowed the State to file an information by affidavit and that child abuse under NRS 200.508 may be charged either as a single continuing offense or as multiple distinct acts, depending on the…

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the revocation of Garcia's probation and imposition of his suspended sentence. It held that the district court properly verified the alleged nontechnical violation by independently reviewing the preliminary-hearing transcript and related reports, and that Garcia's prior…

The Nevada Supreme Court held that the state has jurisdiction to prosecute a tribal member for a second-degree murder caused by a controlled substance when the crime’s consummating act—the victim’s death—occurred in non‑tribal state territory, and that the Major Crimes Act does not preempt such concurrent…

The Nevada Supreme Court held that the challengers had standing and that their facial vagueness challenge to the parental-notification and judicial-bypass provisions was ripe. It concluded that the provisions were subject to the criminal-statute vagueness standard, that the challengers showed a reasonable likelihood…

The court held that the Department of Taxation improperly denied Nevada Health and Bioscience Asset Corporation's sales and use tax exemption application without applying the statutory criteria for charitable organizations.

The Nevada Supreme Court held that elder‑exploitation charges may be prosecuted only once per victim and that theft charges may be aggregated under a single scheme, vacating fourteen elder‑exploitation and fourteen theft convictions, affirming the remaining counts, and remanding for a revised judgment.

The court held that the statute governing rights during court-ordered examinations is unconstitutional to the extent it conflicts with the procedural requirements for civil-discovery examinations.

The Nevada Supreme Court held that compliance with the registration requirement under NRS 176.0931(3)(a) does not require an offender to complete the full registration period set by NRS 179D.490; thus Del Toro was improperly denied release from lifetime supervision.

The court affirmed Richt's murder conviction, holding that a defendant may not establish the foundation for a self-defense theory solely through evidence of the victim's violent character.

The Nevada Supreme Court denied a petition for extraordinary writ relief challenging the refusal to dismiss a corporate-governance action involving a religious nonprofit. It held that the neutral-principles exception to ecclesiastical abstention is not limited to real-property disputes and applies whenever a dispute…

The court held that NRS 134.070 requires a per capita without representation distribution, so only the decedent's living first cousins inherited and a first cousin once removed could not inherit by representation.

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Friedlander's petition for judicial review of a Nevada Gaming Control Board decision concerning the payout of two Kentucky Derby wagers.

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed Matadamas-Serrano’s convictions for first-degree murder with a deadly-weapon enhancement and burglary while in possession of a deadly weapon. It held that the district court properly rejected the Batson challenge, did not violate the Confrontation Clause by admitting or limiting the…

The court held that Nevada had home-state jurisdiction over the child's custody proceeding because the child's stay in Canada before the Nevada filing was a temporary absence and the child had therefore lived in Nevada for the required six-month period.

The court affirmed dismissal of Orla's petition for judicial review because Orla lacked statutory standing under NRS 533.450(1). The court held that, for decisions concerning the administration of determined water rights, the petitioner must show that the decision affected an existing personal or property right…

The Nevada Supreme Court answered a certified question, holding that forced masturbation without intrusion into a genital or anal opening does not constitute sexual assault under NRS 200.366. The Court based its decision on a plain‑meaning reading of the statute’s intrusion clause.

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed Duckket's convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in finding him competent to represent himself, that his speedy‑trial and statutory rights were not violated, that the admission of a lower‑quality video did not deprive him of a fair trial, that his compulsory process…

The court affirmed the civil commitment order because the custody-credit statute applies only to confinement credited against a criminal sentence imposed after conviction, not to a preventive and treatment-oriented civil commitment.

The Nevada Supreme Court reversed Ajay’s conviction, holding that his Miranda waiver was not knowing and intelligent because of his limited English proficiency and the police’s failure to provide an interpreter, and that the admission of his statements was not a harmless error.