Case library
Nevada family-law decisions, briefed for practice.
Practitioner summaries with key holdings, posture, disposition, and the statutes cited - up front, where you need them. Every summary links to the full opinion.
4 results for “EDCR 5.219(b)” in Divorce, Property & Alimony
DOUGLAS VS. DOUGLAS
Oct 11, 202424-38333 · 86888-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")The Court of Appeals reviewed the denial of attorney fees in a divorce proceeding for abuse of discretion, citing Miller v. Wilfong, 121 Nev. 619, 622, 119 P.3d 727, 729 (2005). It reiterated that attorney fees and…
CONTE VS. CONTE
Jun 25, 202525-27917 · 87945-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Judgment of the district court reversed, the sanctions award vacated, and the matter remanded to the district court for proceedings consistent with the order.The Court of Appeals reviewed the statutory-interpretation question de novo, citing Martin v. Martin, 138 Nev. 786, 789, 520 P.3d 813, 817 (2022), and applied the plain-language rule from Leven v. Frey, 123 Nev. 399,…
ROSIAK VS. ROSIAK C/W 86632
Feb 22, 202424-06443 · 85464-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED IN PART AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order.").**Standard of review.** The court reviews "decisions regarding child support for an abuse of discretion," Romano v. Romano, 138 Nev. 1, 7, 501 P.3d 980, 985 (2022), abrogated in part on other grounds by Killebrew v.…
HORTA VS. HORTA (CHILD CUSTODY) C/W 86978
Oct 3, 202424-36910 · 86873-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.The panel reviewed each challenge under abuse-of-discretion standards and declined to disturb findings supported by substantial evidence. **Income determination.** A district court's factual findings, including a…
Every summary is independently verified against the source opinion; summaries are informational research aids, not legal advice, and no substitute for reading the decision. Topic groupings are derived automatically from each case’s category tag and cited statutes; a case may appear under two topics.