5322 research outputs found
Sort by
Young v. State [of Nevada], 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 47 (Oct. 16, 2025)
No full textCOURT OVERRULES PRECEDENT WHICH REQUIRES TRIAL COURTS TO REMOVE JURORS BASED ON DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF BIAS
Nothing to Gain: The Disparate Impact of the Capital Gains Tax Preference on Women and Persons of Color
No full textTax preference provisions are scattered across the Internal Revenue Code, and the capital gains tax rate offers an enormous advantage for wealthy taxpayers. When first enacted, it was touted as eliminating the “lock-in effect” which caused investors to hold on to their investment property. Today, it is justified as encouraging investment and eliminating gains produced merely by the passage of time. The provision’s unequal benefits are hidden from the picture. Although not overtly dis-criminatory, the preference operates as a tax cut for the wealthy. Women and per-sons of color see little benefit from the lower tax rate. The difficulty of comparing tax data by gender, race, and ethnicity exacerbates this inequity. The exclusion of women and persons of color from the reduced tax rate contributes to the overall inequality of wealth, a situation that must be remedied. Historically, Congress has been reluctant to make meaningful adjustments to eliminate this built-in inequality, such as taxing unrealized gains or providing comparable benefits to women and persons of color. This Article provides a brief history of the capital gains preference, examines statistical income and wealth disparities based on gender and race, and proposes solutions to reduce the negative impact of the capital gains preference that leaves behind women and persons of color
eCarrots: Prison Control and Profits from Correctional Tablets
Full text linkIn recent years, tablets have gained tremendous popularity behind bars for their ability to expand access to educational and rehabilitative services for people in prison. However, there are downsides to tablet implementation, including high costs at the expense of a captive population and shifting power dynamics resulting in possible volatility. This Article examines the use of correctional tablets in jails and prisons as mechanisms for administrative control and profit-making in an era of beleaguered correctional budgets. It also considers legal and policy implications related to the disproportionately negative impact of the introduction of tablets on people in poverty, increased dependency on third-party contractors through the elimination of existing service structures, and the dangers of screentime addiction for people in prison. Ultimately, tablet suppliers are likely to continue working their way into prison systems, and there are many benefits to the incarcerated population from this expansion. However, it must be done thoughtfully and under careful oversight of interested parties to ensure the worst impacts are mitigated
Black v. Dist. Ct., 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 18 (Apr. 17, 2025)
Full text linkDirect claims are unique to shareholders and pursuable in state court, while Derivative claims affect the corporation as well
BOURNE VS. VALDES, M.D., 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 30 (June 12, 2025)
Full text linkAs a matter of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court determined the “suicide rule” is not a complete defense to claims of medical malpractice. Suicide does not relieve a medical provider of liability for the patient’s death. The determination is instead resolved under the established framework of medical malpractice law
State of Nevada v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 27 (June 5, 2025).
Full text linkAn order resolving a motion to correct an illegal sentence is not a final judgment or verdict and is therefore appealable by the state
In the Matter of H.B., III, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 15 (Apr. 3, 2025)
Full text linkIn a decisive decision, the Nevada Supreme Court held that convicted felons are not automatically disqualified from acting as a legal guardian
Garcia v. State, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. 16 (Apr. 17, 2025)
Full text linkTHE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY DENIED RELIEF BECAUSE PAROLE ELIGIBILITY FOR JUVENILE NONHOMICIDE OFFENDERS ARISES BY OPERATION OF LAW AND DOES NOT REQUIRE RESENTENCING OR CORRECTION OF A LAWFUL JUDGMENT
Business Law in the Ring: Nevada\u27s Rebel Rules Versus Delaware\u27s Corporate Crown
Full text linkThis White Paper will begin with an analysis of specialized courts, starting with the Delaware Court of Chancery. It will then compare Delaware’s courts with the business courts in Texas and Nevada and will provide a detailed implementation plan for a specialized business court in Nevada. Next, this White Paper will address the differences between the corporate laws in Nevada and Delaware, including the benefits of incorporating in Nevada versus Delaware. The White Paper will then briefly discuss the proposed general jurisdiction bill in Nevada, and why it ultimately failed. Finally, this White Paper will end with remarks on where Nevada is at in its corporate law journey, why its corporate laws are better for business, and where it should be headed in the next few years
