Case library
Nevada family-law decisions, briefed for practice.
4 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.
4 cases · counsel of record McFarling Law Group
KRAGEN VS. DIST. CT. (KRAGEN)
Aug 15, 2024140 Nev. Adv. Op. 49 (Ct. App. 2024) · 88187-COA · Nevada Supreme Court
Petition denied.Standard of review. Subject matter jurisdiction, including home state jurisdiction under the UCCJEA, is reviewed de novo. Ogawa v. Ogawa, 125 Nev. 660, 667, 221 P.3d 699, 704 (2009). De novo review "properly includes…
RAMOS VS. FRANKLIN (CHILD CUSTODY)
Mar 16, 2023139 Nev. Adv. Op. 6, 525 P.3d 1227 (2023) · 84520 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.Standard of review: visitation decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion, Rennels v. Rennels, 127 Nev. 564, 568-69, 257 P.3d 396, 399 (2011); statutory interpretation is reviewed de novo, Potter v. Potter, 121 Nev.…
MARTINEZ VS. AVILA, JR. (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jun 30, 2022138 Nev. Adv. Op. 49, 512 P.3d 758 (2022) · 83023 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.**Standard of review.** The court applies deferential review to the district court's factual findings, setting them aside only if clearly erroneous or unsupported by substantial evidence, while reviewing legal questions…
NANCE VS. FERRARO (CHILD CUSTODY)
Apr 5, 2018134 Nev. Adv. Op. 21 (Ct. App. 2018) · 72454-COA · Nevada Supreme Court
Reversed and remanded.Standard of review: Evidentiary rulings on motions in limine and child-custody determinations are reviewed for abuse of discretion. State ex rel. Dep't of Highways v. Nev. Aggregates & Asphalt Co., 92 Nev. 370, 376, 551…
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.