4th Quarter - 2011 Advanced Opinions
All opinions are in reverse date order and available as PDF
Rogers v. State     Thursday, 29 December 2011
Appoint Attorney
127nevadvopno88.pdf
Text
Toston v. State     Thursday, 29 December 2011
In a post-conviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the judgment of conviction he alleged that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by misadvising him about the right to appeal from a judgment of conviction based on a guilty plea and failing to file an appeal when Toston expressed dissatisfaction at the sentencing hearing.
127nevadvopno87.pdf
Text
Fourth St. Place v. Travelers Indem. Co.     Thursday, 29 December 2011
Insurance Coverage
Efficient Proximate Cause
Cause of Loss
127nevadvopno86.pdf
Text
In re Fontainebleau Las Vegas Holdings     Thursday, 29 December 2011
Proper scope of the record before Nevada Supreme court and the extent to which court may determine facts, if at all, when it considers a certified question from a federal court.
127nevadvopno85.pdf
Text
State v. Dist. Ct. (Armstrong)     Thursday, 29 December 2011
Admissibility of retrograde extrapolation evidence to estimate a defendant’s blood alcohol level at a point in time based on a blood sample taken at a later point in time.  We conclude that although retrograde extrapolation evidence is relevant in a prosecution for driving under the influence, under certain circumstances such evidence may be unfairly prejudicial and therefore inadmissible.
127nevadvopno84.pdf
Text
Munda v. Summerlin Life & Health Ins. Co.     Thursday, 29 December 2011
ERISA Preemption
127nevadvopno83.pdf
Text
Sicor, Inc. v. Hutchison     Thursday, 15 December 2011
The district court must apply a multifactor test to determine whether there is a reason to believe that the party seeking a change of venue will not receive a fair trial in the community where the case originated.
127nevadvopno82.pdf
Text
Sicor, Inc. v. Sacks     Thursday, 15 December 2011
A district court’s decision to defer a final ruling on a motion to change venue until after jury selection and determination of jury impartiality should not be treated as a denial of the motion.
127nevadvopno81.pdf
Text
Holt v. Regional Trustee Services Corp.     Thursday, 15 December 2011
Preliminary Injunctions - Real Property - Claim Preclusion
Foreclosure Mediation Rules
127nevadvopno80.pdf
Text
Reno Newspapers v. Gibbons     Thursday, 15 December 2011
Emails - Freedom of Information
127nevadvopno79.pdf
Text
Choy v. Ameristar Casinos     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Procedure required by NRCP 56(f) for the party opposing a motion for summary judgment to request the denial or continuance of the motion in order to obtain additional affidavits or conduct further discovery
127nevadvopno78.pdf
Text
Public Agency Compensation Trust v. Blake     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
the proper method of apportioning permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits between prior and subsequent industrial injuries when the impairment ratings for those injuries were based on different editions of the applicable guide.
127nevadvopno77.pdf
Text
Estate of Smith v. Mahoney’s Silver Nugget     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
the duty element of a negligence cause of action must be determined as a matter of law by considering whether the wrongful act that precipitated the plaintiff’s injury was foreseeable.  
127nevadvopno76.pdf
Text
Friedman v. Dist. Ct.     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Child Custody / State Jurisdiction / UCCJEA
Text
127nevadvopno75.pdf
Klasch v. Walgreen Co.     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
We conclude that when a pharmacist has knowledge of a customer-specific risk with respect to a prescribed medication, the pharmacist has a duty to exercise reasonable care in warning the customer or notifying the prescribing doctor of this risk.
127nevadvopno74.pdf
Text
Chateau Vegas Wine v. S. Wine & Spirits     Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Injunctions
127nevadvopno73.pdf
Text
Canarelli v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 10 November 2011
We conclude that NRS 78.600 does not confer authority upon the district court to appoint an unwilling director trustee of a dissolved corporation because, once the director trustee has completed winding up the affairs of the corporation as provided for in NRS 78.590, his or her power to act on behalf of the corporation terminates.
127nevadvopno72.pdf
Text
Pacificare of Nevada v. Rogers     Thursday, 27 October 2011
Arbitration
127nevadvopno71.pdf
Text
Cervantes v. Health Plan of Nevada     Thursday, 27 October 2011
ERISA section 514 precludes state law claims of negligence and negligence per se against a managed care organization[1] (MCO) contracted by an ERISA plan to facilitate the development of the ERISA plan’s network of health care providers.
127nevadvopno70.pdf
Text
Nunnery v. State     Thursday, 27 October 2011
Judgment of Conviction
untimely notice of evidence
127nevadvopno69.pdf
Text
Wilson v. State     Thursday, 27 October 2011
McConnell I precludes the State from relying on the same predicate felony to support felony murder and felony aggravating circumstances when the defendant has pleaded guilty to first-degree murder based on both premeditated and deliberate murder and felony murder.  We conclude that McConnell I does not preclude the State from using the same predicate felony in those circumstances.
127nevadvopno68.pdf
Text
State, Dep’t of Taxation v. Masco Builder     Thursday, 20 October 2011
Statue of Limitations and Tolling
Petition for Judicial Review
127nevadvopno67.pdf
Text
Walters v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 13 October 2011
NRS Chapter 40 for seeking a deficiency judgment based upon a breach of guaranty.  
127nevadvopno66.pdf
Text
Stephans v. State     Thursday, 06 October 2011
Best Evidence Rule
Hearsay
127nevadvopno65.pdf
Text
G.C. Wallace, Inc. v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 06 October 2011
A landlord who seeks summary eviction in justice court is not prevented from subsequently bringing a claim for damages in district court, as the landlord did here.  
127nevadvopno64.pdf
Text
Merits Incentives v. Dist. Ct.     Thursday, 06 October 2011
Professional Conduct that specifically governs an attorney’s actions under these facts, the attorney in this case fulfilled any ethical duties by giving prompt notification to opposing counsel, soon after his receipt of the disk from an unidentified source, through an NRCP 16.1 disclosure.
We adopt factors to aid a district court in determining whether disqualification is warranted under such circumstances, and conclude in this case that the factors weigh in favor of the district court’s decision.
127nevadvopno63.pdf
Text