Case library
Nevada family-law decisions, briefed for practice.
11 decisions, organized by topic. Practitioner summaries with key holdings, posture, disposition, and the statutes cited - up front, where you need them. Every summary links to the full opinion.
Case Library = case briefs of the decisions themselves. For long-form explainers of the governing law, Guides; for the exact quotable passages, verified verbatim, the Canon.
9 cases · counsel of record Kelleher & Kelleher · Custody & Relocation
LORENZO VS. GENDEBIEN (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jun 18, 2026142 Nev. Adv. Op. 46 (Ct. App. 2026) · 90082-COA · Nevada Supreme Court
Reversed and remanded.**Standard of review.** The court reviewed the NRCP 12(b)(5) dismissal de novo, applying the "rigorous standard of review" from Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of North Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 227-28, 181 P.3d 670, 672 (2008),…
ROSSER VS. TAYLOR (CHILD CUSTODY)
Apr 23, 202525-18256 · 87864-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")Standard of review. Child custody decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion, Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996), and custody determinations supported by substantial evidence will not…
ZAMBOANGA VS. ORTIZ (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jan 19, 202424-02134 · 86050-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Custody determination REVERSED and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the children's best interests would be served by modification.The Court of Appeals (Gibbons, Bulla, Westbrook) reversed on two independent grounds: a due process violation and an abuse of discretion in denying an evidentiary hearing despite prima facie showings by both movants.…
ASKEW VS. ASKEW (CHILD CUSTODY)
Dec 13, 202323-40411 · 84315-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")**Standard of review.** District courts have broad discretion in child custody cases, reviewed for abuse of discretion; factual findings will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence — "evidence that a…
SHEEHAN VS. MANTY (CHILD CUSTODY)
Mar 16, 202323-08107 · 84125-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")This is an appeal from a family court order dismissing a child custody action under NRS 125A.365 on inconvenient-forum grounds in favor of California. The Court of Appeals addressed four assignments of error. On the…
RAMSEIER VS. RIVAS (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jan 23, 202323-02049 · 84645-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's discretionary family-law determinations deferentially. Best-interest determinations are "reviewed deferentially" (Davis v. Ewalefo, 131 Nev. 445, 450, 352 P.3d 1139,…
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…
WALLACE VS. WALLACE (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jun 22, 202222-19787 · 83591-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's denial of a motion to modify physical custody without an evidentiary hearing for an abuse of discretion. See Bautista v. Picone, 134 Nev. 334, 338, 419 P.3d 157, 160…
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.