Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 1938–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bullington v. Mizegreen2 sentences2017However, in Buffington, 478 P.2d 500 , the Utah Supreme Court previously addressed whether this statute applies extraterritorially, and we need not embark upon an exhaustive analysis of the statute under the framework set forth in Key Bank and Branch Banking if Buffington is determinative here. 2017However, in Buffington, 478 P.2d 500, the Utah Supreme Court previously addressed whether this statute applies extraterritorially, and we need not embark upon an exhaustive analysis of the statute under the framework set forth in Key Bank and Branch Banking if Buffington is determinative here. | 1 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State ex rel. Nevada Tax Commission v. Boerlin
neutral
2 sentences1938The former act was under consideration by this court in State v. Boerlin, 38 Nev. 39 , 144 P. 738 , and the court, after an exhaustive analysis of its provisions, including the provision that the “commission is hereby empowered to exercise general supervision and control over the entire revenue system of the state,” section 4, held that the commission was not empowered to order a board of county commissioners to reduce its rate of county taxation. 1938The former act was under consideration by this court in State v. Boerlin, 38 Nev. 39 , 144 P. 738 , and the court, after an exhaustive analysis of its provisions, including the provision that the “commission is hereby empowered to exercise general supervision and control over the entire revenue system of the state,” section 4, held that the commission was not empowered to order a board of county commissioners to reduce its rate of county taxation. | 1 | 1938–1938 |
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.