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.
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.
7 results for “NRS 125.140(2)” in Child Support
LEEMING VS. LEEMING (CHILD SUPPORT)
Nov 15, 197187 Nev. 530, 490 P.2d 342 (1971) · 6491 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed; appellant ordered to pay respondent an additional $1,000 for counsel's services on appeal.The court affirmed the district court's refusal to apply NRCP 68 to post-judgment proceedings in a divorce matter. Following the divorce, the respondent moved under NRS 125.140(2) to increase child support and, on…
HILDAHL VS. HILDAHL (CHILD SUPPORT)
Oct 15, 197995 Nev. 657, 601 P.2d 58 (1979) · 10220 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("Affirmed.")The court affirmed a judgment for support arrearages and a contempt order against a father who unilaterally reduced fixed monthly support-and-maintenance payments when a child came to live with him. Accrued alimony and…
NORRIS VS. NORRIS (CHILD SUPPORT)
Feb 16, 197793 Nev. 65, 560 P.2d 149 (1977) · 8967 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.The court (Thompson, J.) affirmed the termination of a father's decree-based child support obligation upon his son reaching the reduced age of majority. The 1972 decree ordered support 'until said children respectively…
MCINNIS VS. MCINNIS (CHILD SUPPORT)
Aug 9, 197894 Nev. 532, 582 P.2d 802 (1978) · 9911 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. ("the order denying Appellant's motion to modify the judgment and decree of divorce by increasing the child support payments must be affirmed. . . . we affirm.")The court affirmed the denial of a mother's motion to increase child support. Jurisdiction to modify rested on NRS 125.140(2) (Cavell v. Cavell), and review is for abuse of discretion (Edwards v. Edwards). Applying the…
LAMB VS. LAMB (CHILD SUPPORT)
Nov 13, 196783 Nev. 425, 433 P.2d 265 (1967) · 5307 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed. The court affirmed both the order adjudging the father in contempt and the order denying his motion to modify the decree.Batjer, J. The father appealed an order adjudging him in contempt and denying his motion to modify the divorce decree while he was in contempt. A 1963 property settlement agreement requiring $200 monthly child support…
NOBLE VS. NOBLE (CHILD SUPPORT)
Jun 10, 197086 Nev. 459, 470 P.2d 430 (1970) · 5972 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed in all respects except as to the suspension of child support, which is remanded for adequate findings on the effect of suspension on the child's present comfort and future well-being.The appeal challenged a district court order that, as a sanction for the custodial mother's persistent denial of court-ordered visitation, suspended alimony and child support and relieved the father of maintaining the…
LAIRD VS. LAIRD (CHILD SUPPORT)
Dec 30, 197793 Nev. 687, 572 P.2d 543 (1977) · 9127 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.This brief per curiam opinion affirms a district court's refusal, in a decree-modification proceeding, to order the mother to contribute to child support after custody of the parties' two minor children was awarded to…
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.