5322 research outputs found
Sort by
Reno Real Estate Development, LLC; and Reno Property Manager, LLC v. Scenic Nevada, Inc.; City of Reno v. Reno Real Estate Development, LLC; and Reno Property Manager, LLC; and Scenic Nevada, Inc. 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 48
No full textUNDER THE RENO MUNICIPAL CODE, AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGNS ARE DISTINCT FROM ON- OR OFF- PREMISES ADVERTISING DISPLAYS
Clark County Dept. of Family Services v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 10 (Mar. 6, 2025)
Full text linkCourt-ordered disclosure of confidential information during a criminal investigation is, in the words of the Nevada Supreme Court, “an important issue that implicates both constitutional concerns and the compelling public interest in encouraging citizens to report suspected child abuse.”By entertaining this petition for writ relief, the Court sought to clarify NRS § 432B.290(4) and outlined the circumstances necessary for a district court to order disclosure of confidential reporter identities. The Court here ultimately denied the petition and specified that “NRS § 432B.290(4) provides a limited privilege for reporter identities[] [t]hat…applies to keep reporter identities confidential if [Department of Family Services] first determines that disclosure of that information would harm an investigation or harm the life or safety of any person.
Virgin Valley Water Dist. vs. Paradise Canyon, LLC, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 19 (Apr. 24, 2025)
Full text linkA GOVERNMENT AGENT IS CONSIDERED A PRIVATE PARTY IN CONTRACT DISPUTES, A JUDGE DETERMINES QUESTIONS OF LAW, THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING DOES NOT APPLY TO ACTIONS THAT COMPLY WITH A CONTRACT, ONLY A PERMIT HOLDER IS REQUIRED TO SHOW BENEFICAL USE OF PUBLIC WATER, UNAMBIGOUS CONTRACT PROVISIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, A JUDGE CANNOT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THEIR OWN FACTS, ATTORNEY COMMENTS SHOULD NOT BE IRRELEVANT AND INFLAMMATORY, AND TIME LIMITS CANNOT BE ARBITRARILY ENFORCED
Forging Ahead or Proceeding with Caution; Developing Policy for Generative Artificial Intelligence in Legal Education
No full textGenerative Artificial Intelligence is rapidly being integrated into every facet of society, including a growing impact on law schools. It has become abundantly clear that there is a need to develop well-defined governing policies for its use and adoption in legal education. This article offers an introductory analysis of related approaches currently taken in various law schools, exploring the factors influencing these policies and their ethical implication. A comparative review of institutional policies reveals both similarities and unique approaches. Common themes include the need for balance between limited use and outright reliance, as well as the need for transparency and the promotion of academic integrity. Similarly, additional recurring concerns and considerations are explored, such as the potential impact on curricular integration and academic rigor.
Ethical and professional implications surrounding using these tools and platforms in legal education set the stage; delving into the importance of understanding the limitations and risks, a discussion of educating students about the appropriate contexts for using AI as a learning tool is presented. Additionally, the unique role of law school faculty governance in shaping these policies is explored, emphasizing the critical decision-making processes involved in establishing enforceable and implementable guardrails and guidelines. By looking at the focus behind policies across multiple institutions, best practices and approaches begin to emerge. Takeaways include future implications and recommendations for law schools and faculty in effectively governing the emerging use of generative artificial intelligence in legal education. The implications go beyond the walls of academia and impact practicing attorneys significantly. To prepare for this reality, law schools must think carefully about and generate policy approaches in line with universal goals and considerations. This article aims to provide valuable insights and recommendations for prudent governance, ultimately contributing to the ongoing discourse on its responsible and effective use within the legal academic sphere
