5322 research outputs found
Sort by
The Effects of the Hyper-Globalization of Legalized Sports Betting on Match-Fixing and Competition Manipulation in the Olympics
Get PDFJesse Calvin Gilbert v. State of Nevada, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 33 (May 9, 2024)
Get PDFAn investigatory motive does not invalidate an inventory search if the search would have occurred in the same manner absent the motive, and the circumstances were not fabricated as a pretext. Accordingly, the Supreme Court of Nevada affirmed the district court’s decision denying Appellant’s motion to suppress, finding the inventory search reasonable under the totality of the circumstances
Jones v. Ghadiri, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (Apr. 28, 2024)
Get PDFThis case establishes an important distinction between adverse possession and prescriptive easements in Nevada. Adverse possession requires hostile, actual, peaceable, open, notorious, continuous, and uninterrupted possession for five years, plus the payment of any relevant taxes. A prescriptive easement, on the other hand, only requires adverse, continuous, open, and peaceable use for five years, without any tax payments. The Court rejected the Joneses’ attempt to claim a comprehensive prescriptive easement that would grant them exclusive control over a 591-square-foot area that was owned by Ghadiri. The Court’s analysis hinged on the fact that comprehensive prescriptive easements blur the line between adverse possession and prescriptive easements. Comprehensive prescriptive easements are permissible only under exceptional circumstances, which the Joneses failed to demonstrate. As such, the Court affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Ghadiri, since the Joneses’ claims did not meet the criteria for either adverse possession or a comprehensive prescriptive easement. Ultimately, this case strengthens Nevada’s property law by providing new case law and an analysis that better differentiates between adverse possession and prescriptive easements
Limprasert v. PAM Specialty Hosp. of Las Vegas, LLC, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 45 (June 27, 2024)
Get PDFNRS 41A dictates Nevada’s statutory scheme for professional negligence, or “medical malpractice” claims. Over the past decade, the Nevada Supreme Court’s professional negligence jurisprudence has maintained a generally textualist approach to NRS 41A’s mechanical workings. That changed four years ago with the Court’s decision in Estate of Curtis v. S. Las Vegas Medical Investors, LLC, 136 Nev. 350, 466 P.3d 1263 (2020) and the creation of a “common knowledge” exception negating the need for medical affidavits under NRS 41A.071. Absent common knowledge, or the statute’s other exceptions found in NRS 41A.100, a professional negligence complaint must be paired with an affidavit by a medical professional in order to overcome a motion to dismiss. In the instant case, the Court reappraised and subsequently overruled the “common knowledge” exception in Curtis due to its deviation from the Nevada Legislature’s intent behind the affidavit requirement. Instead of the opaque Curtis standard delineating professional vs. ordinary negligence, Limprasert refocuses a district court’s analysis to whether the plaintiff is harmed by “a provider of health care rendering services in the course of a professional relationship.” Further, the Court ruled that NRS 41.071’s affidavit requirement can be satisfied “by reference in the complaint and was executed before the complaint was filed.” Finally, because Limprasert fulfilled the affidavit requirement under the Baxter v. Dignity Health standard, the district court erred in dismissing the complaint for nonadherence to NRS 41.071
Kragen v. Dist. Ct., 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 49 (Aug. 15, 2024)
Get PDFThe Nevada Court of Appeals held that, when evaluating appropriate home state jurisdiction in child custody disputes, the temporary or permanent nature of a child’s absence from the state must be assessed in light of the totality of the circumstances. By adopting the totality of the circumstances test, Nevada has fallen in line with a majority of states that have implemented the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (“UCCJEA”)
Wynn v. The Associated Press, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. 6 (Feb. 8, 2024)
Get PDFFor the first time, the Nevada Supreme Court directly discussed a plaintiff’s burden of proof, under the second prong of NRS 41.660(3). Specifically, the Court held that the second prong’s burden on the plaintiff to produce prima facie evidence of a probability of prevailing on the respective public figure defamation claim was only met if the plaintiff proffers evidence sufficient for a jury to find, by clear and convincing evidence, in favor of the plaintiff on the actual malice element. A failure by the plaintiff to meet the clear and convincing standard requires the court to dismiss a public figure defamation claim pursuant to NRS 41.650 and NRS 41.660(1)(a), as to limit the chilling effect of civil litigation on First Amendment free speech
Selling Sustainable Sodas, Shoes, Sweets Sustainably: Reasonable, Objective, Sustainability Marketing in a Global Energy and Environmental Transition
Get PDFWe Got Next: Las Vegas\u27 Transformation into the Sports Capital of the World
Get PDFLas Vegas, known for its vibrant entertainment scene and bustling casinos, is ready to step off the bench and onto the court to play in the big league, as the city gears up to become the ultimate sports capitol of the world. This White Paper explores the emergence of professional sports franchises and the exciting evolution of Las Vegas into a premier sports destination. Part I of this White Paper traces the development of sport franchises, ownership dynamics, and the creation of iconic sports venues. Part II explores the legal and economic aspects related to the sports market in Las Vegas, investigating the favorable corporate laws in Nevada and gaining insights from industry experts to understand the impact of regulations on sports franchises and events. The economic implications of sports expansion on the local economy and concerns surrounding public funding for sporting ventures are also addressed. Finally, Part III looks ahead to the future of Las Vegas as a sports city and identifies key considerations for sustainable growth and community engagement. This White Paper invites readers to explore the dynamic intersection of entertainment, innovation, and athletic excellence in one of the world\u27s most exciting cities. Las Vegas has indeed “got next,” and the world is watching as it transforms into the sports capital of the world
