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.
9 results for “NRS 18.020(4)”
ARZOLA VS. ESTRADA
Dec 22, 202222-40144 · 83941-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirming in part and reversing in part (Docket No. 83251-COA), reversing (Docket No. 83941-COA) and remanding.The court reviewed the child custody order, the child support and relocation decisions, and the attorney fees award all for abuse of discretion, citing Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996);…
ARZOLA VS. ESTRADA (CHILD CUSTODY)
Dec 22, 202222-40141 · 83251-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part and reversed in part (Docket No. 83251-COA); reversed (Docket No. 83941-COA) and remanded.The Court of Appeals reviewed the child custody order, child support determination, relocation question, and attorney fees award for abuse of discretion. *Wallace v. Wallace*, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543…
SHAHROKHI VS. BURROW (CHILD CUSTODY)
May 12, 202222-15098 · 83726 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal in Docket No. 83726 dismissed in part; judgments of the district court affirmed.Constitutional issues received de novo review. Jackson v. State, 128 Nev. 598, 603, 291 P.3d 1274, 1277 (2012). The court rejected Ali's facial challenge to NRS 125C.0035, reasoning that fit parents have equal…
SHAHROKHI VS. BURROW C/W 82245
May 12, 202222-15092 · 81978 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal in Docket No. 83726 dismissed in part; judgments of the district court affirmed.Constitutional review was de novo under Jackson v. State, 128 Nev. 598, 603, 291 P.3d 1274, 1277 (2012). The court rejected Ali's facial challenge to NRS 125C.0035, relying on Rico v. Rodriguez, 121 Nev. 695, 704, 120…
SHAHROKHI VS. BURROW C/W 81978
May 12, 202222-15092 · 82245 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal in Docket No. 83726 dismissed in part; judgments of the district court affirmed.Constitutional issues are reviewed de novo. Jackson v. State, 128 Nev. 598, 603, 291 P.3d 1274, 1277 (2012). The court held that the constitutional challenge to NRS 125C.0035 fails because, between two fit parents, the…
ROE VS. ROE (CHILD CUSTODY)
May 18, 202323-15702 · 84893-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated, and remanded. The court states: "we AFFIRM the district court's modification of custody, REVERSE as to the parenting time allocation and improper delegation of the district court's authority, VACATE the award of attorney fees and costs, and REMAND the case for reassignment to a different district court judge and proceedings consistent with this order."**Standard of review.** A district court's child custody order is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). Factual findings are upheld if supported by…
KOGOD VS. CIOFFI-KOGOD C/W 71994
Apr 25, 201919-18121 · 71147 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.Standard of review. The court reviews alimony, property division, sanctions, and cost awards in a divorce for abuse of discretion. Shydler v. Shydler, 114 Nev. 192, 196, 954 P.2d 37, 39 (1998); Wolff v. Wolff, 112 Nev.…
KOGOD VS. CIOFFI-KOGOD C/W 71994
Apr 25, 201919-18121 · 71994 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.Standard of review. The court reviews divorce-decree decisions, including alimony and community property dispositions, for abuse of discretion. Buchanan v. Buchanan, 90 Nev. 209, 215, 523 P.2d 1, 5 (1974); Wolff v.…
ROE VS. ROE (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jul 27, 202323-24071 · 84893-COA · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.**Standard of review.** Child custody orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). Factual findings stand if supported by substantial evidence. Ellis v.…
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.