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 “NRS 125.010(9)” in Divorce, Property & Alimony
FASSARI VS. FASSARI (FAMILY)
Oct 23, 202525-46389 · 90183-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.**Standard of review.** The court reviewed the district court's determination of personal jurisdiction de novo, citing Fulbright & Jaworski LLP v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. 30, 35, 342 P.3d 997, 1001 (2015). It…
ISSARESCU VS. ISSARESCU (DIVORCE)
Jun 8, 196682 Nev. 239, 415 P.2d 67 (1966) · 5031 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("Affirmed.")Thompson, J. The husband appealed a decree granting the wife a divorce on the ground of three years' separation without cohabitation, contending there was no explicit evidence that the separation was voluntary and with…
FAUSONE VS. FAUSONE (DIVORCE PROPERTY & ALIMONY)
Apr 21, 195975 Nev. 222, 338 P.2d 68 (1959) · 4138 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. The judgment of divorce in favor of the husband was affirmed; the portions of the judgment denying the wife alimony were reversed and the case remanded with instructions to amend the judgment to provide a reasonable amount for the wife's support. Costs to appellant.By the Court, Badt, J. On the wife's appeal, the court affirmed the divorce and reversed the denial of alimony. The husband was granted a divorce on the ground of three years' separation without cohabitation (NRS…
BOZELLI VS. BOZELLI (DIVORCE)
Sep 11, 196985 Nev. 525, 458 P.2d 356 (1969) · 5775 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.Ray obtained a divorce on the ground of one year's separation without cohabitation under NRS 125.010(9), effective July 1, 1967. The action was commenced March 30, 1967, before the amendment reducing the required…
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.