Nevada Supreme Court decisions from Nov. 21, 2007
On November 21, 2007, the Nevada Supreme Court issued three published opinions:
In Wilson v. State, the Court held that Nevada’s constitutional protections against double jeopardy exceed those offered by the federal constitution. Here, Wilson’s original conviction was for four counts of using a minor in the production of pornography and four counts of possession of a visual presentation depicting sexual conduct of a person under 16 years of age. was sentenced to 4 terms of 24 to 72 months on the possession charges to run concurrently with 4 consecutive terms of 10 years to life on the production charges. However, on the original appeal, the Nevada Supreme Court reversed three of the four production convictions all of the convictions arose out of a single criminal act. Upon remand for resentencing, the district court increased Wilson’s minimum sentence for each possession conviction from 24 months to the statutory maximum, 28 months, also ruled that the possession sentences should run consecutively—instead of concurrently, as specified in the original sentencing hearing—with his sentence on the one remaining production count. In reversing, the Court reiterated its previous rule: “When a court is forced to vacate an unlawful sentence on one count, the court may not increase a lawful sentence on a separate count.”
In Horgan v. Felton, the Nevada Supreme Court retreats from a previous position, and holds that in cases concerning title to real property, attorney fees are only allowable as special damages in slander of title actions, not merely when a cloud on the title to real property exists. The Court also held that because the burden of an easement is appurtenant tot eh property, any rights or obligations of servitude are tied to ownership or occupancy of the land, rather than to an individual. Accordingly, a reservation of a right to a grantor to promulgate rules for a servient use passes to a successor holder. However, such absent authority in a deed, a court may not promulgate such rules.
In Allstate Ins. Co. v. Thorpe , the Nevada Supreme Court held that, under Nevada’s “prompt-pay” statute, NRS 690B.012, (1) there is no private right of action for medical providers medical services providers who administer care to persons insured under contracts of “casualty insurance for an insurer fails to promptly pay claims, but (2) medical providers, as persons with a direct and immediate pecuniary interest in the prompt payment of medical payment benefits, may seek administrative remedies before the Nevada Department of Insurance (NDOI), subject to judicial review under the Nevada Administrative Procedure Act.
