custody hearing in Nevada

15 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2025 5 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Nevada courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (14)

Case	Followed	Cited
Monahan v. Hogangreen nevapp · 2022 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025Hogan, 138 Nev. 58 , 67, 507 P.3d 588, 595 (Ct. App. 2022) (holding the custody factors outlined in NRS 125C.0035 may still be relevant in relocation proceedings even if the petitioner already has primary custody). 13 Count OF APPEALS OF NEVADA (0) 19578 Bo 138 Nev. at 59, 507 P.3d at 589 . 2025Hogan, 138 Nev. 58 , 67, 507 P.3d 588, 595 (Ct. App. 2022) (holding the custody factors outlined in NRS 125C.0035 may still be relevant in relocation proceedings even if the petitioner already has primary custody). 13 Count OF APPEALS OF NEVADA (0) 19578 Bo 138 Nev. at 59, 507 P.3d at 589 .	2	2
Nance v. Ferrarogreen nevapp · 2018 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022See NRS 125C.0035(4) ("In determining the best interest of the child, the court shall consider and set forth its specific findings concerning, among other things: [list of factors]." (emphasis added)); see also Nance, 134 Nev. at 162 n.10, 418 P.3d at 687 n.10 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA Koi 19478 15 (suggesting in dicta that the custody factors are relevant to NRS 125C.007(1)(b)); Seminario v. Pierzchanowski, No. 64670, 2015 WL 9596958 , at 2 (Nev. 2022See NRS 125C.0035(4) ("In determining the best interest of the child, the court shall consider and set forth its specific findings concerning, among other things: [list of factors]." (emphasis added)); see also Nance, 134 Nev. at 162 n.10, 418 P.3d at 687 n.10 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA Koi 19478 15 (suggesting in dicta that the custody factors are relevant to NRS 125C.007(1)(b)); Seminario v. Pierzchanowski, No. 64670, 2015 WL 9596958 , at 2 (Nev.	2	2
Castle v. Simmonsgreen nev · 2004 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 2 sentences 2022Hogan responds that the district court was not required to apply the custody best interest factors to determine the child's best interests under NRS 125C.007(1)(b) because she already had primary physical custody and she moved for relocation under NRS 125C.006, which does not require a custody determination, unlike NRS 125C.0065, which 3Citing Castle v. Simmons, 120 Nev. 98, 104-05 , 86 P.3d 1042, 1047 (2004), Monahan further contends the district court relied on facts that would have been "res judicate as of the March 2019 order. 2022Hogan responds that the district court was not required to apply the custody best interest factors to determine the child's best interests under NRS 125C.007(1)(b) because she already had primary physical custody and she moved for relocation under NRS 125C.006, which does not require a custody determination, unlike NRS 125C.0065, which 3Citing Castle v. Simmons, 120 Nev. 98, 104-05 , 86 P.3d 1042, 1047 (2004), Monahan further contends the district court relied on facts that would have been "res judicate as of the March 2019 order.	2	2
Trujillo v. Stategreen nev · 2013 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2014–2020 2 sentences 2020Const. art. 6, § 6(1) (setting forth a custody requirement for habeas corpus); NRS 34.724(1) (providing that a habeas petition is available to a person under a sentence of imprisonment or death); Harris v. State, 130 Nev. 435 , 439 n.1, 329 P.3d 619 , 622 n.1 (2014) (noting that the exclusive-remedy provision in NRS 34.724(2) does not apply to remedies that are available only to those not in custody); Trujillo v. State, 129 Nev. 706, 716 , 310 P.3d 594, 600 (2013) CFor a person 2 who is not in custody, Nevada's post-conviction habeas corpus scheme does not apply. . . 2020Const. art. 6, § 6(1) (setting forth a custody requirement for habeas corpus); NRS 34.724(1) (providing that a habeas petition is available to a person under a sentence of imprisonment or death); Harris v. State, 130 Nev. 435 , 439 n.1, 329 P.3d 619 , 622 n.1 (2014) (noting that the exclusive-remedy provision in NRS 34.724(2) does not apply to remedies that are available only to those not in custody); Trujillo v. State, 129 Nev. 706, 716 , 310 P.3d 594, 600 (2013) CFor a person 2 who is not in custody, Nevada's post-conviction habeas corpus scheme does not apply. . .	2	2
Murphy v. Murphyred nev · 1968 · cited in 2 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 1972–2000 2 sentences 2000See Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968). 2000See Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968).	1	2
Ellis v. Caruccigreen nev · 2007 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015 1 sentence 2015See id.	1	1
Marshall v. Warden, Nevada State Prisongreen nev · 1967 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014In Marshall v. Warden, this court, while acknowledging the problem with calling the post-conviction petition a "habeas corpus" petition given the custody requirement set forth in the Constitution, approved of the new post-conviction remedy. 83 Nev. 442, 444-45, 434 P.2d 437, 439 (1967), superseded by statute as stated in SUPREME COURT Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 34 P.3d 519 (2001). 2014In Marshall v. Warden, this court, while acknowledging the problem with calling the post-conviction petition a "habeas corpus" petition given the custody requirement set forth in the Constitution, approved of the new post-conviction remedy. 83 Nev. 442, 444-45, 434 P.2d 437, 439 (1967), superseded by statute as stated in SUPREME COURT Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 34 P.3d 519 (2001).	1	1
BRUNZELL CONSTR. CO., INC. v. Harrah's Clubgreen nev · 1965 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414	1	1
Meyer v. SECOND JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC.green nev · 1979 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414	1	1
Casino Operations, Inc. v. Grahamgreen nev · 1970 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414	1	1
Valley Health System, LLC v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clarkgreen nev · 2011 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012 2 sentences 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414 2012See Valley Health, 127 Nev. at 172 , 252 P.3d at 679 (writ relief may be available to prevent the discovery of allegedly privileged materials ‘ ‘because once such information is disclosed, it is irretrievable”); Meyer v. District Court, 95 Nev. 176, 177 , 591 P.2d 259, 260 (1979) (considering a petition for a writ of prohibition seeking to bar the enforcement of a district court order that precluded a party from testifying at a custody hearing unless the party waived her Fifth Amendment privilege and answered certain discovery questions); see also Brunzell Constr. v. Harrah’s Club, 81 Nev. 414	1	1
Perry v. District Court of the Seventh Judicial District of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Esmeraldagreen nev · 1918 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 ( 2002See Milton, 107 Nev at 771, 819 P.2d at 248 ; La Potin, 75 Nev at 266, 339 P.2d at 123-24 ; Perry, 42 Nev. at 288 , 174 P. at 1059 . 75 Nev. 189 , 336 P.2d 1073 (1959).	1	1
La Potin v. La Potingreen nev · 1959 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 ( 2002See Milton, 107 Nev at 771, 819 P.2d at 248 ; La Potin, 75 Nev at 266, 339 P.2d at 123-24 ; Perry, 42 Nev. at 288 , 174 P. at 1059 . 75 Nev. 189 , 336 P.2d 1073 (1959).	1	1
Milton v. Geslergreen nev · 1991 · cited in 1 Nevada opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 2 sentences 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 ( 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 (	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

Case	Cited	Years
Lyerla v. Ramsay green nev · 1966 2 sentences 1980The district court’s reliance upon Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966), as mandating a hearing in North Carolina is misplaced. 1980The district court’s reliance upon Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966), as mandating a hearing in North Carolina is misplaced.	2	1972–1980
Ferguson v. Krepper neutral nev · 1967 2 sentences 1973Lyerla v. Ramsay, supra; Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); cf. Dean v. Kimbrough, 88 Nev. 102 , 492 P.2d 988 (1972). 1973Lyerla v. Ramsay, supra; Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); cf. Dean v. Kimbrough, 88 Nev. 102 , 492 P.2d 988 (1972).	2	1972–1973
Falconi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. green nev · 2024 1 sentence 2025Fa/cold. 140 Nev., Adv.	1	2025–2025
Foley v. Morse & Mowbray green nev · 1993 1 sentence 2016Foley v. Morse & Mowbray, 109 Nev. 116, 120 , 848 P.2d SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 44e44 519, 521 (1993) (explaining that a party who fails to make a specific objection to judicial misconduct at trial waives the argument on appeal). 2 Accordingly, we ORDER the judgment of the district court REVERSED AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings consistent with this order. , C.J.	1	2016–2016
Warden, Nevada State Prison v. Peters green nev · 1967 2 sentences 2014The challenges of this post- conviction approach were highlighted in Warden v. Peters, 83 Nev. 298, 429 P.2d 549 (1967). 2014The challenges of this post- conviction approach were highlighted in Warden v. Peters, 83 Nev. 298, 429 P.2d 549 (1967).	1	2014–2014
Pellegrini v. State green nev · 2001 2 sentences 2014In Marshall v. Warden, this court, while acknowledging the problem with calling the post-conviction petition a "habeas corpus" petition given the custody requirement set forth in the Constitution, approved of the new post-conviction remedy. 83 Nev. 442, 444-45, 434 P.2d 437, 439 (1967), superseded by statute as stated in SUPREME COURT Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 34 P.3d 519 (2001). 2014In Marshall v. Warden, this court, while acknowledging the problem with calling the post-conviction petition a "habeas corpus" petition given the custody requirement set forth in the Constitution, approved of the new post-conviction remedy. 83 Nev. 442, 444-45, 434 P.2d 437, 439 (1967), superseded by statute as stated in SUPREME COURT Pellegrini v. State, 117 Nev. 860, 34 P.3d 519 (2001).	1	2014–2014
Smith v. Smith green nev · 1966 2 sentences 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 ( 2002Scotlund lied to the district court, during the custody hearing, when he testified that the children had lived in Nevada “all their lives.” The fact is that the children had never resided in Nevada and apparently after being kidnapped in Norway were flown to Texas where presumably they now live. 20 Milton v. Gesler, 107 Nev. 767, 771 , 819 P.2d 245, 248 (1991) (holding that because the district court acted without jurisdiction, the decree of divorce is void); La Potin v. La Potin, 75 Nev 264, 266, 339 P.2d 123, 123-24 (1959) (same); Perry v. District Court, 42 Nev 284, 288, 174 P. 1058, 1059 (	1	2002–2002
Moore v. Moore green nev · 1959 2 sentences 2002See Milton, 107 Nev at 771, 819 P.2d at 248 ; La Potin, 75 Nev at 266, 339 P.2d at 123-24 ; Perry, 42 Nev. at 288 , 174 P. at 1059 . 75 Nev. 189 , 336 P.2d 1073 (1959). 2002See Milton, 107 Nev at 771, 819 P.2d at 248 ; La Potin, 75 Nev at 266, 339 P.2d at 123-24 ; Perry, 42 Nev. at 288 , 174 P. at 1059 . 75 Nev. 189 , 336 P.2d 1073 (1959).	1	2002–2002
Dean v. Kimbrough green nev · 1972 2 sentences 1973Lyerla v. Ramsay, supra; Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); cf. Dean v. Kimbrough, 88 Nev. 102 , 492 P.2d 988 (1972). 1973Lyerla v. Ramsay, supra; Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); cf. Dean v. Kimbrough, 88 Nev. 102 , 492 P.2d 988 (1972).	1	1973–1973
Sisson v. Sisson neutral nev · 1961 2 sentences 1972Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966); Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710 , 447 P.2d 664 (1968); Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); Sisson v. Sisson, 77 Nev. 478 , 367 P.2d 98 (1961); Osmun v. Osmun, 73 Nev. 112 , 310 P.2d 407 (1957). 1972Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966); Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710 , 447 P.2d 664 (1968); Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); Sisson v. Sisson, 77 Nev. 478 , 367 P.2d 98 (1961); Osmun v. Osmun, 73 Nev. 112 , 310 P.2d 407 (1957).	1	1972–1972
Osmun v. Osmun neutral nev · 1957 2 sentences 1972Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966); Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710 , 447 P.2d 664 (1968); Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); Sisson v. Sisson, 77 Nev. 478 , 367 P.2d 98 (1961); Osmun v. Osmun, 73 Nev. 112 , 310 P.2d 407 (1957). 1972Lyerla v. Ramsay, 82 Nev. 250 , 415 P.2d 623 (1966); Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710 , 447 P.2d 664 (1968); Ferguson v. Krepper, 83 Nev. 408 , 432 P.2d 668 (1967); Sisson v. Sisson, 77 Nev. 478 , 367 P.2d 98 (1961); Osmun v. Osmun, 73 Nev. 112 , 310 P.2d 407 (1957).	1	1972–1972

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125C.0035 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125C.006 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125C.0065 (4) NV § Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125C.007 (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

PA 324 (1961–2026) NY 102 (1977–2026) AL 91 (1996–2026) IL 69 (1968–2025) CA 61 (1948–2024) OH 60 (1997–2026) MI 53 (1958–2026) TX 42 (1990–2026) NC 40 (1978–2024) MD 35 (1970–2025) LA 34 (1972–2020) CT 34 (1982–2026) IN 31 (1990–2026) NJ 30 (1953–2026) UT 23 (1980–2026) CO 23 (1970–2026) NM 23 (1981–2025) FL 20 (1975–2017) MS 20 (1995–2026) DC 17 (1978–2016) VA 17 (1993–2026) TN 16 (1990–2024) MT 15 (1977–2012) NV 15 (1972–2025) MA 15 (1990–2025) WA 14 (1951–2026) VT 14 (1990–2025) NE 14 (1979–2025) GA 13 (1962–2024) AK 13 (1981–2020) WI 13 (1962–2026) MN 12 (1985–2026) MO 11 (1980–2018) SC 10 (1993–2021) IA 10 (2004–2023) ME 9 (1998–2022) KS 9 (2007–2025) KY 8 (2006–2025) ND 8 (1991–2003) DE 8 (1995–2026) AR 7 (1981–2019) HI 7 (1996–2022) SD 7 (1982–2022) AZ 7 (1994–2026) ID 7 (1969–2022) NH 7 (1999–2023) RI 6 (1997–2022) WY 6 (1998–2022) OR 4 (1987–2005) WV 3 (1968–2019) OK 2 (1977–2004)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check