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.
4 results for “NRS 125A.465(6)” in Custody & Relocation
BLOUNT VS. BLOUNT (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jul 7, 2022138 Nev. Adv. Op. 52, 512 P.3d 1254 (2022) · 82095 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.This is a matter of first impression interpreting NRS 125A.465, Nevada's UCCJEA registration provision. The court applied de facto plain-meaning statutory construction, citing Washoe Med. Ctr. v. Second Judicial Dist.…
STEVENS VS. LANEY (CHILD CUSTODY)
Aug 21, 202691371-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part. ("Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED IN PART and DISMISS IN PART this appeal.")**Standards of review.** The court identified competing framings of the reunification issue and conducted a two-part inquiry: (1) whether Kayden's Law impacts the custody order, and (2) whether the district court's…
COBIAN VS. RAMIREZ (CHILD CUSTODY)
Oct 18, 202424-39361 · 88076-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")The Court of Appeals reviewed several distinct rulings under differing standards. **Subject matter jurisdiction / registration of the foreign order.** The court reviewed subject matter jurisdiction de novo, giving…
GRIGALANZ VS. COPAS (CHILD CUSTODY)
Jul 9, 202691619-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Affirmed. ("we ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.")This is an appeal from a district court order dismissing a custody petition for lack of standing. The Court of Appeals reviewed the dismissal de novo, applying "the same rigorous, de novo standard as dismissal for…
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.