8 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2018 0 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hayes v. Gallachergreen2 sentences2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 | 2 | 2 |
Castle v. Simmonsgreen2 sentences2018As noted above, even under the changed circumstances analysis, Castle's provision that pre- decision evidence of domestic violence can be considered only if the parties or the court were unaware of its existence or the extent of the offending conduct applies only to limit what the party seeking a custody change can present to demonstrate that changed circumstances supporting modification exist. 9 Castle, 120 Nev. at 105 , 86 P.3d at 1047 . °This is not to suggest that preexisting evidence can never be used offensively by a party seeking to show custody modification is in the child's best inter 2018As noted above, even under the changed circumstances analysis, Castle's provision that pre- decision evidence of domestic violence can be considered only if the parties or the court were unaware of its existence or the extent of the offending conduct applies only to limit what the party seeking a custody change can present to demonstrate that changed circumstances supporting modification exist. 9 Castle, 120 Nev. at 105 , 86 P.3d at 1047 . °This is not to suggest that preexisting evidence can never be used offensively by a party seeking to show custody modification is in the child's best inter | 1 | 6 |
Coury v. Robisongreen2 sentences2016See e.g., Coury v. Robison, 115 Nev. 84, 88-89 , 976 P.2d 518, 520-21 (1999) (stating that conditions that are not void as a matter of law may become void in particular circumstances if changed circumstances so dictate). 2 2Although Coury's circumstances are not the same as those in this case, the arbitrator was correct that the changed circumstances doctrine is a possibility in Nevada, and thus he did not manifestly disregard the law on unconscionability. 2016See e.g., Coury v. Robison, 115 Nev. 84, 88-89 , 976 P.2d 518, 520-21 (1999) (stating that conditions that are not void as a matter of law may become void in particular circumstances if changed circumstances so dictate). 2 2Although Coury's circumstances are not the same as those in this case, the arbitrator was correct that the changed circumstances doctrine is a possibility in Nevada, and thus he did not manifestly disregard the law on unconscionability. | 1 | 1 |
Sims v. Simsgreen2 sentences2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 | 1 | 1 |
Wallace v. Wallacegreen2 sentences2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 | 1 | 1 |
Murphy v. Murphyred2 sentences2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 2004Stability is one of the primary objectives behind the changed circumstances requirement, and children’s stability should not be disturbed simply because the noncustodial parent has been remarried. 8 Consequently, James’s remarriage alone is not enough to establish changed circumstances. 9 Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s order changing child custody and awarding child support to James. 10 1 Wallace v. Wallace, 112 Nev. 1015, 1019 , 922 P.2d 541, 543 (1996). 2 Sims v. Sims, 109 Nev. 1146, 1148 , 865 P.2d 328, 330 (1993). 3 Murphy v. Murphy, 84 Nev. 710, 711 , 447 P.2d 664, 665 (1968 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
McMonigle v. McMonigle
green
2 sentences2016Although McMonigle generally prohibits consideration of events preceding the most recent custody order from being used to establish a change of circumstances, McMonigle, 110 Nev. at 1408 , 887 P.2d at 743 , there is an exception for evidence of domestic violence that has not previously been presented to the court, Castle, 120 Nev. at 105 , 86 P.3d at 1047 (concluding that the changed circumstances doctrine does not bar the presentation of evidence of domestic violence when a party or the court was unaware of the evidence at the time of the previous custody order). 2016Although McMonigle generally prohibits consideration of events preceding the most recent custody order from being used to establish a change of circumstances, McMonigle, 110 Nev. at 1408 , 887 P.2d at 743 , there is an exception for evidence of domestic violence that has not previously been presented to the court, Castle, 120 Nev. at 105 , 86 P.3d at 1047 (concluding that the changed circumstances doctrine does not bar the presentation of evidence of domestic violence when a party or the court was unaware of the evidence at the time of the previous custody order). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Rivero v. Rivero
green
2 sentences2016Additionally, no substantial changed circumstances were required for the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) I94Th court to review custody as neither party had primary custody of the child, Riven, 125 Nev. at 430 , 216 P.3d at 227 , and regardless, appellant's relocation to Japan was a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant a review of custody, Hayes v. Gallacher, 115 Nev. 1, 7 , 972 P.2d 1138, 1141 (1999) (proposed relocation constituted changed circumstances and justified reexamining custody). 2016Additionally, no substantial changed circumstances were required for the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) I94Th court to review custody as neither party had primary custody of the child, Riven, 125 Nev. at 430 , 216 P.3d at 227 , and regardless, appellant's relocation to Japan was a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant a review of custody, Hayes v. Gallacher, 115 Nev. 1, 7 , 972 P.2d 1138, 1141 (1999) (proposed relocation constituted changed circumstances and justified reexamining custody). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.
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.