8 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
LaMantia v. Redisigreen2 sentences2020See Pope v. Motel 6, 121 Nev. 307, 317-18 , 114 P.3d 277, 283-84 (2005) (holding that qualified immunity applies to statements to the police about suspected criminal activity, and the plaintiff must demonstrate that the statements were false SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 4110. and made with actual malice, i.e., "reckless disregard for veracity or with knowledge of falsity," to prevail on a defamation claim); LaMantia v. Redisi, 118 Nev. 27, 30 , 38 P.3d 877, 879 (2002) (providing that malice is an element of a malicious prosecution claim). 2020See Pope v. Motel 6, 121 Nev. 307, 317-18 , 114 P.3d 277, 283-84 (2005) (holding that qualified immunity applies to statements to the police about suspected criminal activity, and the plaintiff must demonstrate that the statements were false SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 4110. and made with actual malice, i.e., "reckless disregard for veracity or with knowledge of falsity," to prevail on a defamation claim); LaMantia v. Redisi, 118 Nev. 27, 30 , 38 P.3d 877, 879 (2002) (providing that malice is an element of a malicious prosecution claim). | 5 | 5 |
Lester v. Buchanengreen2 sentences2020See Lester v. Buchanen, 112 Nev. 1426, 1429, 929 P.2d 910, 913 (1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2020See Lester v. Buchanen, 112 Nev. 1426, 1429, 929 P.2d 910, 913 (1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Edgar v. Wagnergreen2 sentences2020See Edgar v. Wagner, 101 Nev. 226, 228-29 , 699 P.2d 110, 112 (1985) (discussing the scope of prosecutorial immunity in the context of a malicious prosecution claim). 2020See Edgar v. Wagner, 101 Nev. 226, 228-29 , 699 P.2d 110, 112 (1985) (discussing the scope of prosecutorial immunity in the context of a malicious prosecution claim). | 1 | 1 |
Pope v. MOTEL 6green2 sentences2020See Pope v. Motel 6, 121 Nev. 307, 317-18 , 114 P.3d 277, 283-84 (2005) (holding that qualified immunity applies to statements to the police about suspected criminal activity, and the plaintiff must demonstrate that the statements were false SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 4110. and made with actual malice, i.e., "reckless disregard for veracity or with knowledge of falsity," to prevail on a defamation claim); LaMantia v. Redisi, 118 Nev. 27, 30 , 38 P.3d 877, 879 (2002) (providing that malice is an element of a malicious prosecution claim). 2020See Pope v. Motel 6, 121 Nev. 307, 317-18 , 114 P.3d 277, 283-84 (2005) (holding that qualified immunity applies to statements to the police about suspected criminal activity, and the plaintiff must demonstrate that the statements were false SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 4110. and made with actual malice, i.e., "reckless disregard for veracity or with knowledge of falsity," to prevail on a defamation claim); LaMantia v. Redisi, 118 Nev. 27, 30 , 38 P.3d 877, 879 (2002) (providing that malice is an element of a malicious prosecution claim). | 1 | 1 |
Dutt v. Krempgreen2 sentences2002App. Ct. 2000) (affirming dismissal of malicious prosecution claim for failure to initiate or procure institution of criminal proceedings against plaintiff). 11 111 Nev. 567, 571-75 , 894 P.2d 354, 357-59 (1995). 12 Id. at 571-72 , 894 P.2d at 357. 13 See supra note 8. 2002App. Ct. 2000) (affirming dismissal of malicious prosecution claim for failure to initiate or procure institution of criminal proceedings against plaintiff). 11 111 Nev. 567, 571-75 , 894 P.2d 354, 357-59 (1995). 12 Id. at 571-72 , 894 P.2d at 357. 13 See supra note 8. | 1 | 1 |
Randall v. Lemkegreen1 sentence2002Tex. 1999) (citing with approval Texas Supreme Court’s adoption of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 653 malicious prosecution requirement that defendant initiate or procure criminal prosecution); Schroeder v. De Bertolo, 912 F. Supp. 23, 26 (D.P.R. 1996) (holding that a criminal proceeding is a necessary element of a malicious prosecution claim); Randall v. Lemke, 726 N.E.2d 183, 186 (Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Read v. Bakergreen1 sentence2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. | 1 | 1 |
Schroeder v. De Bertologreen1 sentence2002Tex. 1999) (citing with approval Texas Supreme Court’s adoption of Restatement (Second) of Torts § 653 malicious prosecution requirement that defendant initiate or procure criminal prosecution); Schroeder v. De Bertolo, 912 F. Supp. 23, 26 (D.P.R. 1996) (holding that a criminal proceeding is a necessary element of a malicious prosecution claim); Randall v. Lemke, 726 N.E.2d 183, 186 (Ill. | 1 | 1 |
Simpson v. Mars Inc.green2 sentences2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. 2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. | 1 | 1 |
Nevada Power Co. v. Haggertygreen2 sentences2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. 2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. | 1 | 1 |
Blackjack Bonding v. City of Las Vegas Municipal Courtgreen2 sentences2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. 2002Ct., 116 Nev. 1213, 1217 , 14 P.3d 1275, 1278 (2000). 3 Id. (citing Simpson v. Mars, Inc., 113 Nev. 188, 190 , 929 P.2d 966, 967 (1997)). 4 Id. 5 Nevada Power Co. v. Haggerty, 115 Nev. 353, 358 , 989 P.2d 870, 873 (1999). 6 Under NRS 463.310, the Gaming Commission and the State Gaming Control Board have the authority to investigate and review allegations that a licensee has violated gaming regulations. 7 See, e.g., Read v. Baker, 430 F. Supp. 472, 476 (D. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.