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.
5 results for “NRS 128.110(2)(a)” in Termination of Parental Rights
IN RE: MATTER OF E.R. C/W 73198
May 3, 2018134 Nev. Adv. Op. 29, 416 P.3d 242 (2018) · 73198 · Nevada Supreme Court
Petitions granted.Standard of review: The court reviewed the consolidated original mandamus petitions under NRS 34.160, noting that mandamus is the appropriate vehicle to challenge an NRS Chapter 432B placement order because such orders…
IN RE: MATTER OF E.R. C/W 73198
May 3, 2018134 Nev. Adv. Op. 29, 416 P.3d 242 (2018) · 73272 · Nevada Supreme Court
Petitions granted.Standard of review: A writ of mandamus may issue "to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." Clark Cty. Dist. Att'y v. Eighth Judicial…
Tammila G. v. State, Department of Human Resources
Dec 28, 2006122 Nev. 1418, 148 P.3d 759 (2006) · 46438 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.Standard of review: A party petitioning to terminate parental rights must establish by clear and convincing evidence that (1) termination is in the child's best interest and (2) parental fault exists, citing NRS 128.105…
MULKERN VS. DIST. CT. (CLARK CTY. DEP'T OF FAMILY SERV.'S)
Oct 18, 2018134 Nev. Adv. Op. 82, 429 P.3d 277 (2018) · 76399 · Nevada Supreme Court
Petition granted in part.Standard of review and writ standards. The court reiterated that mandamus is available to compel an act required by law or to control arbitrary or capricious exercises of discretion, citing Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v.…
DALY VS. DALY (TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS)
Mar 6, 1986102 Nev. 66, 715 P.2d 56 (1986) · 15423 · Nevada Supreme Court
Affirmed.Applying the clear and convincing evidence standard adopted in Cloninger v. Russell, 98 Nev. 597, 655 P.2d 528 (1982) (following Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982)), and the two-part jurisdictional/dispositional…
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.