The Nevada Supreme Court held that law-of-the-case principles—not jurisdiction—govern a successor judge’s authority to revisit an earlier ruling, and upheld removal of an unlawful plea drop-down.
The Nevada Supreme Court held that the graduated-sanctions statutes apply to sentences imposed after July 1, 2020, while allowing courts to consider earlier nontechnical violations when later technical violations occur.
The Nevada Supreme Court reversed a murder conviction because the trial court prevented the defense from arguing that the evidence supported the defendant’s sister as the shooter.
The Nevada Supreme Court held that NRCP 12(g)(2) bars new nonjurisdictional dismissal grounds on remand and that subject-matter jurisdiction is measured when the action begins.
The Nevada Supreme Court held that NRS 52.325 is not the exclusive route for authenticating medical records and ordered a new personal-injury trial after key records and medical-lien evidence were excluded.
The Nevada Supreme Court held that requiring prosecutorial consent to waive a criminal jury trial does not violate separation of powers.
The Nevada Supreme Court vacated and remanded with instructions to dismiss, holding en banc that while a party may challenge a district court’s jurisdiction over a first petition for judicial review in a subsequent NAPA petition, the subsequent petition must itself strictly comply with NRS 233B.130(2)(a) by naming all parties of record. Rocha’s second petition, which named DHHS but not the Personnel Commission, was jurisdictionally defective from the outset, and a belated amendment could not cure the defect.
The Nevada Supreme Court reversed a 43 percent markup on an attorney fee award under NRS 22.100(3), holding that for a paying client with private counsel at a freely negotiated hourly rate, the billed rate presumptively establishes the market rate for lodestar calculations. A district court may award a higher rate only when the applicant demonstrates the firm discounted its rates for pro bono or public-interest representation — a finding that the firm “could have charged more” is insufficient.