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 1 courts 1980–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thran v. First Judicial District Courtgreen2 sentences2019Prostack further reiterated that "words and conduct. . . short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule." Id. (quoting Thran, 79 Nev. at 181 , 380 P.2d at 300 ). 2019Prostack further reiterated that "words and conduct. . . short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule." Id. (quoting Thran, 79 Nev. at 181 , 380 P.2d at 300 ). | 6 | 6 |
Prostack v. Lowdengreen2 sentences2019However, ultimately, lift is upon the plaintiff" . . . that the duty rests to bring the case to trial within the period specified by the rule." Pros tack, 96 Nev. at 231 , 606 P.2d at 1100 ; see also id. ("[W]ords and conduct, short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule." Id. (quoting Thran, 79 Nev. at 181 , 380 P.2d at 300 )). 2019However, ultimately, lift is upon the plaintiff" . . . that the duty rests to bring the case to trial within the period specified by the rule." Pros tack, 96 Nev. at 231 , 606 P.2d at 1100 ; see also id. ("[W]ords and conduct, short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule." Id. (quoting Thran, 79 Nev. at 181 , 380 P.2d at 300 )). | 1 | 5 |
Boren v. City of North Las Vegasgreen2 sentences2015Boren v. City of N. Las Vegas, 98 Nev. 5, 5-6 , 638 P.2d 404, 404 (1982) (holding that court-ordered stays extend the five-year period); Prostack v. Lowden, 96 Nev. 230, 231 , 606 P.2d 1099, 1099-1100 (1980) (explaining that a stipulation must expressly extend the five-year deadline; a stipulation to continue the trial date that makes no mention of the five-year rule does not suffice, and a defendant's "(w)ords and conduct, short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule" (quoting Thran v. First Judicial Dist. 2015Boren v. City of N. Las Vegas, 98 Nev. 5, 5-6 , 638 P.2d 404, 404 (1982) (holding that court-ordered stays extend the five-year period); Prostack v. Lowden, 96 Nev. 230, 231 , 606 P.2d 1099, 1099-1100 (1980) (explaining that a stipulation must expressly extend the five-year deadline; a stipulation to continue the trial date that makes no mention of the five-year rule does not suffice, and a defendant's "(w)ords and conduct, short of a written stipulation' cannot estop a defendant from asserting the mandatory dismissal rule" (quoting Thran v. First Judicial Dist. | 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.