1st Quarter - 2012 Advanced Opinions
State v. Huebler     Thursday, 26 April 2012
128nevadvopno19.pdf
Text
Jones v. SunTrust Mortgage, Inc.     Thursday, 26 April 2012
128nevadvopno18.pdf
Text
MountainView Hospital v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 05 April 2012
128nevadvopno17.pdf
Text
Haley v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 05 April 2012
128nevadvopno16.pdf
Text
In re Parental Rights as to C.C.A.     Thursday, 05 April 2012
128nevadvopno15.pdf
Text
Rodriguez v. State     Thursday, 05 April 2012
128nevadvopno14.pdf
Text
Holiday Retirement Corp. v. State, DIR     Thursday, 05 April 2012
128nevadvopno13.pdf
Text
Maestas v. State     Thursday, 29 March 2012
128NevAdvOpNo12.pdf
Text
Wheble v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Statute of Limitations and Nevada's "Saving" Clause
128nevadvopno11.pdf
Text
Bigpond v. State     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Evidence of “other crimes, wrongs or acts” may be admitted for a nonpropensity purpose other than those listed in NRS 48.045(2). To the extent that our prior opinions indicate that NRS 48.045(2) codifies the broad rule of exclusion adopted in State v. McFarlin, 41 Nev. 486, 494, 172 P. 371, 373 (1918), we overrule those opinions. See, e.g., Rowbottom v. State, 105 Nev. 472, 485, 779 P.2d 934, 942 (1989), overruled on other grounds by Jezdik v. State, 121 Nev. 129, 139 n.34, 110 P.3d 1058, 1065 n.34 (2005); Willett v. State, 94 Nev. 620, 622, 584 P.2d 684, 685 (1978); Theriault v. State, 92 Nev. 185, 189, 547 P.2d 668, 671 (1976), overruled on other grounds by Alford v. State, 111 Nev. 1409, 1415 n.4, 906 P.2d 714, 717 n.4 (1995). Consistent with this view of NRS 48.045(2), we clarify the first factor of the test set forth in Tinch v. State, 113 Nev. 1170, 1176, 946 P.2d 1061, 1064-65 (1997), for determining the admissibility of prior bad act evidence to reflect the narrow limits of the general rule of exclusion and that the prosecution must demonstrate that the evidence is relevant for a nonpropensity purpose.
128nevadvopno10.pdf
Text
Weddell v. H20, Inc.     Thursday, 01 March 2012
A judgment creditor has only the rights of an assignee of the member’s interest, receiving only a share of the economic interests in a limited-liability company, including profits, losses, and distributions of assets.
128nevadvopno09.pdf
Text
Webb v. Shull     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Construction Defects NRS 113.150(4)
128nevadvopno08.pdf
Text
Café Moda v. Palma     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Apportionment of damages between negligent tortfeasor and intentional tortfeasor.
128nevadvopno07.pdf
Text
Finkel v. Cashman Professional, Inc.     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Preliminary Injunctions and Nevada's Uniform Trade Secrets Act
128nevadvopno6.pdf.pdf
Text
Carstarphen v. Milsner     Thursday, 01 March 2012
Factors that the district court must consider when determining whether to grant or deny a motion for a preferential trial date to avoid the expiration of NRCP 41(e)’s five-year period, the district court must consider the time remaining in the five-year period when the motion is filed and the diligence of the moving party and his or her counsel in prosecuting the case.
128nevadvopno05.pdf
Text
In re Estate of Melton     Thursday, 16 February 2012
At issue is the proper distribution of the estate of the testator, who, by way of a handwritten will, attempted to disinherit all of his heirs but was unsuccessful in otherwise affirmatively devising his estate. Under the common law, a disinheritance clause was unenforceable in these circumstances.
128nevadvopno04.pdf
Text
Vaile v. Porsboll     Thursday, 26 January 2012
128nevadvopno3.pdf
TEXT
In re Parental Rights as to S.M.M.D.     Thursday, 26 January 2012
128nevadvopno2.pdf
TEXT
Pohlabel v. State     Thursday, 26 January 2012
128nevadvopno1.pdf
TEXT