The Nevada Supreme Court has published a handy dandy guide to the legislation emerging from the 2009 Nevada Legislative Session. The summary offers judges, attorneys, and other interested parties with information on the bills passed during the most recent session, highlighting those of importance to the justice community.
Download your copy here.
At its October meeting, the Nevada Judicial Conduct Code Commission voted to adopt ABA Model Code Canons 2 and 3 and Rules 2.3 through 2.16 and Rules 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5, and the related Commentary, with few modifications.
Canon 2 and Rules 2.1 to 2.2
Rules 2.3 to 2.9
Rules 2.10 to 2.16
Canon 3 and Rules 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 & 3.5
The Commission will consider rules Rules 3.6 through 3.15, Canon 4, and Rules 4.1 through 4.4 at its November meeting. Comment is invited.
See the NSC’s press release: Nevada Judicial Code Commission Issues Proposed Amendments
The Nevada Supreme Court has scheduled a public hearing for Monday, October 6, 2008, at 3 p.m. on proposed amendments to the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure.
See the Proposed changes here. There's been an extensive rewrite, although many changes are simply clarifications or simplifications in wording.
To submit written comments regarding the proposed amendments, submit an original and 8 copies of your comments to
Tracie K. Lindeman,
Clerk of the Supreme Court,
201 S. Carson St.,
Carson City, NV, 89701.
All submissions and notification of live participation in the hearing must be received by the Clerk by 5 p.m. on October 1. The hearing will be held in the Supreme Court Courtroom on the 17th Floor of the Regional Justice Center in Las Vegas and will be videoconferenced to the Courtroom of the Supreme Court in Carson City.
On November 8, 2007, the Nevada Supreme Court issued three published opinions:
In Douglas Disposal v. Wee Haul, Inc, the Nevada Supreme Court, opinion by Justice Saitta, held that regulation of construction waste collection falls within the police powers of the county government because construction waste poses public health and safety concerns. The exclusive franchise here did not violate the dormant commerce clause because it burdened interstate and intrastate commerce equally – no company, whether A Nevada company or a company from another state, other than Douglas Disposal, could haul waste within Douglas County.
In Nelson v. State, the Nevada Supreme Court, opinion by Justice Hardesty, held that NRS 484.348(3)(b), which prohibits drivers from operating a motor vehicle in such a manner as to endanger other persons or property while fleeing a police officer who has signaled for the driver to stop, is not unconstitutionally vague. The Court held that “an individual of average intelligence could easily discern whether he is endangering another person or property while fleeing a pursuing police vehicle.”
In Staccato v. Valley Hospital, the Nevada Supreme Court, in a per curiam opinion, held that a medical expert witness need not have the same credentials or classification as the defendant medical care provider, but instead, must possesses the skill, knowledge, or experience necessary to perform or render the medical procedure or treatment being challenged as negligent. The witness’s opinion must also be such that it would assist the jury. Here, in a case alleging malpractice by a emergency room nurse, the district court improperly excluded the expert opinion of an emergency room physician, regarding the standard of care for delivery of the type of medical treatment received by Staccato.
On Sept. 18, at 12 noon, in Courtroom 12A, the Eighth Judicial District will conduct a Bench/Bar meeting. The topic will be the proposed a mandatory settlement conference program for all civil cases not otherwise entering the arbitration, mediation and/or short trial programs.
The change in the filing date, approved by the Nevada Legislature in AB 505, was signed into law by Governor Gibbons May 18. The filing period for all non-judicial elections remains unchanged. The filing deadlines for Municipal Court judges, who face voters in different years and on different election cycles than state and county judges, were not changed.
The R-J today has a story entitled "Court decision to review ads worries some Nevada lawyers."
I'll worry only if every blog post has to be submitted within 15 days.
Prospective changes to Federal Appellate, Bankruptcy, Civ Pro and Crim Pro Rules
The U.S. Supreme Court todaysent its amendments of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Bankruptcy Procedure, Civil Procedure, and Criminal Procedure. Unless Congress objects, the amendments take effect December 1, 2007.
The Supreme Court of
Enter keywords:
