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 William D. Nobriga
BACKMAN VS. GELBMAN (CHILD CUSTODY) C/W 91070
Jun 16, 202688482-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("we ORDER the judgments of the district court AFFIRMED.")**Standard of review.** The court reviewed child-custody determinations, including parenting-time decisions, for abuse of discretion, affirming factual findings supported by substantial evidence and leaving credibility…
BACKMAN VS. GELBMAN
Feb 13, 2025141 Nev. Adv. Op. 8 (Ct. App. 2025) · 86396-COA · Nevada Supreme Court
Reversed and remanded.Standard of review. Child support orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). An abuse of discretion exists when findings are not supported by…
BACKMAN VS. GELBMAN
Nov 20, 202424-44278 · 86396-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Reversed and remanded. ("we ... ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND REMAND this matter for proceedings consistent with this order.")The court reviewed the child support order for abuse of discretion, citing Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019, 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). An abuse of discretion occurs when findings are not supported by substantial…
FREELOVE VS. FREELOVE
Feb 7, 202323-03755 · 82732-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded.**Standard of review.** The court reviews child support orders for an abuse of discretion. Romano v. Romano, 138 Nev., Adv. Op. 1, 501 P.3d 980, 985 (2022). A district court abuses its discretion when its findings are…
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.