 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Blaine Equip. Co. v. State, No. 44648,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, July 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dispute over a public contract, a district court erred by failing to sua sponte join a successful bidder as a party under Nev. R. Civ. P. 19(a)(1) because complete relief could not have been accorded in its absence where an unsuccessful bidder challenged that contracts awarded violated Nev. Rev. Stat. ch. 333.
|
|||||
| Western Techs., Inc. v. All-American Golf Ctr., Inc., No. 41930,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, August 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a contract case, a district court erred by failing to apply the offset rule to reduce a jury's verdict in a breach of warranty case by the amount paid by other parties in a settlement for a defective golf course retaining wall under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 101.040; moreover, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 17.245 did not apply because it only dealt with tort cases.
|
|||||
| Herbst Gaming, Inc. v. Heller, No. 47620,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, September 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Nevada's Clean Indoor Air Act initiative, an anti-smoking measure, did not violate Nev. Const. art. XIX, § 6's appropriation or expenditure provision because the expense inherent in the general enforcement of criminal statutes was not an expenditure. Thus, the initiative's lack of funding mechanism did not render it invalid.
|
|||||
| Nevadans for Nev. v. Beers, No. 47814,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, September 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Nevada Secretary of State was prohibited from a placing tax and spending control initiative petition on the ballot, where the petition did not strictly adhere to the requirements of Nev. Const. art. XIX, § 2(4). The difference between the filed version of the petition and its circulated version was material and substantial.
|
|||||
| Nevadans for the Prot. of Prop. Rights, Inc. v. Heller, No. 47825,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, September 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in finding property owners' bill of rights initiative encompassed only a single subject, eminent domain, but even though initiative violated Nev. Rev. Stat. § 295.009's single-subject requirement it was not disqualified because Supreme Court of Nevada was able to sever the sections that violated the single-subject requirement.
|
|||||
| State v. Colosimo, No. 45528,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, September 14, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The dismissal of an indictment for using technology to lure children under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 201.560 was affirmed because the intended victim was not less than 16 years of age; an undercover police officer was posing as a child. However, § 201.560 did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment, or the Commerce Clause.
|
|||||
| Medina v. State, No. 43469,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, October 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While the testimony of a forensics nurse about what a victim told her during a sexual assault examination violated the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution because the nurse was a police operative and the victim had died before defendant's trial, the error was harmless because it did not contribute to the verdict obtained.
|
|||||
| Morales v. State, No. 44643,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, October 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case where defendant was charged with burglary and robbery, along with being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, a trial court did not err by ordering a bifurcation of the crimes, instead of a complete severance, in order to prevent the jury from exposure to defendant's ex-felon status.
|
|||||
| Ruvalcaba v. State, No. 44106,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, October 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the sentence imposed as a defendant's ability to comply with the terms of probation was a legitimate factor for a sentencing judge to consider in determining whether to grant probation; thus, the trial court's consideration of defendant's illegal alien status did not violate Martinez v. State.
|
|||||
| Harkins v. State, No. 45024,
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA, October 12, 2006, Decided , October 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err by admitting the victim's statement that defendant shot him and was paid to do it, which was made in response to a 911 dispatcher's question, because the statement was a dying declaration and therefore was an exception to the confrontation protection afforded by the Sixth Amendment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
