Tag: NRS 233B

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 9, 2020

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for July 9, 2020

State, Dep’t of Taxation v. Dist. Ct.

  • Does a government entity have possession, custody, or control over the content on the personnel cell phones of former workers hired through a temporary employment agency so as to be required under NRCP 16.1 to disclose that material.

Anthony S. Noonan IRA, LLC v. U.S. Bank

  • Can the entire amount of a homeowner’s association (HOA) yearly assessment be included in the superpriority piece of an HOA’s lien under 116.3116.

Kuptz-Blinkinsop v. Blinkinsop

  • Does NRS 11.190(1)(a), which requires that an action on a divorce decree commence within six years, apply to claims of enforcement of real property distribution in divorce decrees.

Est. of Curtis v. S. Las Vegas Med. Inv’rs

  • Is a nurse’s mistake in administering a drug to one patient, when the drug was prescribed to a different patient, as well as the alleged failure to thereafter monitor the patient, a matter of professional negligence subject to NRS 41A.071’s affidavit requirement.

Matthews v. State

  • Did the court error in denying a defendant’s Batson objection.

State, Dep’t of Corr. v. DeRosa

  • Does NRCP 4.2(a) require personal service of a petition for judicial review of an agency’s decision.

Nelson v. Nelson

  • Are orders denying a request for a joint preliminary injunction pursuant to EDCR 5.157 in a family law matter appealable under NRAP 3AA(b)(3).

Spencer v. Klementi

  • Does Nevada’s absolute privilege that attaches to judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings extend to statements made during the public-comment period of a planning-commission or improvement-district meeting,

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for October 3, 2019

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for October 3, 2019

State, Bd. of Architecture v. Dist. Ct.

  • Does a petition for judicial review of an administrative agency’s decision that precedes the agency’s decision it contests, vest subject matter jurisdiction in the district court.

Artemis Expl. Co. v. Ruby Lakes Estates

  • What constitutes a valid common-interest community within the meaning of NRS 116.021.

Kilgore v. Kilgore

  • What discretion does a district court have in a divorce proceeding to grant or deny a non-employee spouse’s request for pension payments before the employee spouse has retired.
  • Is vacation and sick pay earned and accrued during a marriage community property subject to equal division un NRS 125.150(1)(b).

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for September 5, 2019

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for September 5, 2019

Spar Bus. Servs., Inc. v. Olson

  • Is the untimely service of a timely filed petition for judicial review of an administrative decision a jurisdictional defect mandating dismissal.

Poole v. Nev. Auto Dealership Invs.

  • What is the meaning of “knowingly” and “material fact” under the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act (NDTPA).

MMAWC, LLC v. Zion Wood Obi Wan Tr.

  • Does the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempt NRS 597.995, which requires agreements that include an arbitration provision to also include a specific authorization for the arbitration provision showing that the parties affirmatively agreed to that provision.

Anderson v. State

  • What is the State’s burden of proof when invoking the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception to the Confrontation Clause.

Azucena v. State

  • What is the standard of review for preserved claims of judicial misconduct during voir dire.

DeMaranville v. Cannon Cochran Mgmt.

  • Did substantial evidence support an appeal officers finding that a retired city police officer’s death was caused by heart disease and was compensable as an occupational disease under NRS 617.457.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 6, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 6, 2018

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (HEARN (MATTHEW))

  • Is the prosecutorial veto within NRS 176A.290, which authorizes a district court to assign certain eligible defendants to a veterans court program, unconstitutional.

RODRIGUEZ (JUAN) VS. STATE

  • Is NRS 200.481(2)(b) an enhancement statute such that battery causing substantial bodily harm cannot be enhanced for committing a crime against a person 60 years of age or older under NRS 193.167.

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (OJEDA (FRANCISCO))

  • Does a district court have authority to order the State to disclose veniremember criminal history information it acquires from a government database that is unavailable to the defense.

LAKE TAHOE PROTECTION DIST. VS. BD. OF ADMIN.

  • Does NRS 616B.578 require an employer to prove that it had knowledge of a specific diagnosis of an employee’s preexisting condition to qualify for reimbursement on a worker’s compensation claim.

O’KEEFE VS. STATE, DEP’T OF MOTOR VEHICLES

  • What is the correct standard of review that a hearing officer must apply to a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) disciplinary decision to terminate an employee.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 1, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for March 1, 2018

STATE, DEP’T. OF BUS. AND INDUS., FIN. INST. DIV. VS. DOLLAR LOAN CTR., LLC

  • Can a payday loan licensee sue to collect on the recovery of a loan made for the purpose of refinancing prior loans under NRS 604A.480(2).

ZENOR VS. STATE, DEP’T OF TRANSP.

  • Are attorney fees prohibited under NRS 18.010(2)(b) in petitions for judicial review of an agency determination.

STATE VS. DIST. CT. (BAKER (JEFFREY))

  • Did a defendant have “an adequate opportunity” to cross-examine a witness when, immediately after the State’s direct examination at the preliminary hearing, the defendant waived his right to continue the preliminary hearing.

ANDREWS (RYAN) VS. STATE

  • Does the simultaneous possession of different schedule I controlled substances constitute separate offenses under NRS 453.3385 or must the weight of the controlled substances be aggregated to form a single offense.

PAWLIK VS. DENG

  • Does NRS 271.595, a statute governing redemption of property sold for default on city tax assessments, create two consecutive redemption periods.

K-KEL, INC. VS. STATE, DEP’T OF TAXATION

  • Did the court lack jurisdiction to consider petitions for judicial review of the Nevada Tax Commission regarding a tax refund request because they were untimely.

DEZZANI VS. KERN & ASSOC.’S, LTD. C/W 69410

  • Can an attorney be held liable for a claim under NRS 116.31183 as an agent of a common-interest community homeowners’ association.
  • Can attorneys litigating pro se and/or on behalf of their law firms recover attorney fees and costs.

JEREMIAS (RALPH) VS. STATE (DEATH PENALTY-DIRECT)

  • Did the district court violate the defendant’s right to a public trial by closing the courtroom to members of the public during jury selection without making sufficient findings to warrant the closure.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 4, 2018

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for January 4, 2018

HEAT & FROST INSULATORS AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 16 VS. LABOR COMM’R

  • Does untimely service of a petition for judicial review of an administrative decision on the Attorney General, pursuant to NRS 233B.130(2)(c)(1), mandate dismissal of the petition.
  • Does NRS 233B.130(5)’s mandate that service of a petition for judicial review on the Attorney General be effected within 45-days, preclude a petitioner from moving for an extension of time after the 45-day period has passed.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 14, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for December 14, 2017

STATE, DEP’T OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERV.’S VS. SAMANTHA INC.

  • Is the denial of a medical marijuana dispensary application subject to judicial review.

SHUE (JOSHUA) VS. STATE

  • Does NRS 200.710 permit a separate conviction for each minor used in a visual presentation depicting sexual conduct of a child.
  • Does NRS 200.730 allow a person to be charged for each image of child pornography they possess or for each instance that a person possessed child pornography.
  • Do Nevada’s statutes barring the sexual portrayal of minors violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Visit the Nevada Appellate Report for more legal news.

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for August 3, 2017

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Nevada Appellate Courts Advance Opinions for August 3, 2017

CITY OF SPARKS VS. RENO NEWSPAPERS, INC.

  • Did the respondent properly seek the disclosure of public records by means of a writ of mandamus even though the regulation at issue and Nevada Administrative Procedure Act, NRS Chapter 233B, provide that the validity of a regulation may be determined in a proceeding for a declaratory judgment?
  • Does NAC 453A.714(1), which governs the confidentiality of information concerning persons who facilitate or deliver medical marijuana services, exempt such information from disclosure under the Nevada Public Records Act, NRS Chapter 239, when the information is contained in medical marijuana establishment business licenses?

LN MGMT. LLC SER. 5105 PORTRAITS PLACE VS. GREEN TREE LOAN SERV., LLC

  • What is the effect of a sale of real property situated in Nevada in violation of an automatic stay from the homeowners’ bankruptcy proceedings commenced in Texas?

GARDNER VS. HENDERSON WATER PARK, LLC

  • To what extent is a member of a limited liability company (LLC) protected in a negligence based tort action against the LLC?

RURAL TELEPHONE CO. VS. PUB. UTIL. COMM’N. OF NEV.

  • Under NRS 703.373(6) or any inherent authority, can the district court extend the deadline for filing the opening brief in a petition for judicial review of a public utilities commission decision?

Can a court be prohibited from staying an administrative board’s decision?

Posted on by Jeff Jaeger

Tate v. State, Bd. of Med. Exam’rs (Nev. Supreme Ct. – Sep. 10, 2015)

NRS 630.356(1) grants physicians the right to judicial review of Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners final decisions, while NRS 630.356(2) simultaneously prohibits district courts from entering a stay of the Board’s decision pending judicial review. The issue is whether this prohibition violates the Nevada Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.

Tate is a surgeon licensed in Nevada. In February 2010, he was scheduled to perform a surgery at Valley Hospital at around 4 p.m. When he arrived to prepare for the surgery, members of the surgical team thought Dr. Tate smelled of alcohol. The hospital halted surgery preparations and asked Dr. Tate to submit to alcohol tests, which he did, admitting that he had consumed some alcohol during his lunch break. Dr. Tate’s blood alcohol level was .06 percent.

The Nevada State Board of Medical Examiners found that Dr. Tate had violated NAC 630.230(1)(c) by rendering services to a patient while under the influence of alcohol and in an impaired condition. The Board suspended Dr. Tate’s license for six months, issued a public reprimand, ordered him to complete an alcohol diversion program and pay $35,564.44 in investigation and prosecution costs and a $5,000 fine, and to complete continuing medical education on the subject of alcohol.

Dr. Tate petitioned for judicial review of the Board’s decision. He also requested a preliminary injunction to stay the sanctions and prevent the Board from filing a report with the National Practitioner Data Bank while judicial review was pending. Medical Boards are required by 45 C.F.R. §§ 60.5(d) and 60.8(a) to report sanctions to the National Practitioner Data Bank, which disseminates information of physician misconduct to health-care entities, including hospitals. In denying injunctive relief, the district court stated that, even though it thought the injunction was clearly warranted, NRS 630.356(2) precluded such action. Dr. Tate appealed the district court’s denial of his injunction request.

Continue reading “Can a court be prohibited from staying an administrative board’s decision?” →