6 Nevada opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rose v. Jollygreen2 sentences2015See Rose v. Jolly, 854 A.2d 824 , 825 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA 22 (0) 947B (Conn. Super. 2015See Rose v. Jolly, 854 A.2d 824 , 825 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA 22 (0) 947B (Conn. Super. | 4 | 4 |
Application of Filippinigreen2 sentences2019While the majority relies on American National for equitable relief, it adopts without explanation a set of factors that differ significantly from those enunciated in American National and reiterated in Benson.2 With all due respect, the remedies available for 2The policies and principles of Nevada water law are unique and special in nature, see Application of Filippini, 66 Nev. 17, 27 , 202 P.2d 535, 540 (1949) (It is . . . settled in this state that the water law and all proceedings thereunder are special in character. . . ."), and are already comprised of "oddities" that cannot be explained 2019While the majority relies on American National for equitable relief, it adopts without explanation a set of factors that differ significantly from those enunciated in American National and reiterated in Benson.2 With all due respect, the remedies available for 2The policies and principles of Nevada water law are unique and special in nature, see Application of Filippini, 66 Nev. 17, 27 , 202 P.2d 535, 540 (1949) (It is . . . settled in this state that the water law and all proceedings thereunder are special in character. . . ."), and are already comprised of "oddities" that cannot be explained | 1 | 1 |
Bliss v. DePranggreen2 sentences1970This court set the standard in Bliss v. DePrang, 81 Nev. 599, 601, 602 , 407 P.2d 726, 727, 728 (1965): “When such a motion [for directed verdict] is presented, the trial court must view the evidence and all inferences most favorably to the party against whom the motion is made. 1970This court set the standard in Bliss v. DePrang, 81 Nev. 599, 601, 602 , 407 P.2d 726, 727, 728 (1965): “When such a motion [for directed verdict] is presented, the trial court must view the evidence and all inferences most favorably to the party against whom the motion is made. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nichter v. Edmiston
yellow
2 sentences1970On review, this court must apply the same standard. [Citations.] “. . .If the facts are disputed or if reasonable men could draw different inferences from the facts, the question is one of fact for the jury and not one of law for the court.” See also Nichter v. Edmiston, 81 Nev. 606 , 407 P.2d 721 (1965); Kline v. Robinson, 83 Nev. 244 , 428 P.2d 190 (1967). 1970On review, this court must apply the same standard. [Citations.] “. . .If the facts are disputed or if reasonable men could draw different inferences from the facts, the question is one of fact for the jury and not one of law for the court.” See also Nichter v. Edmiston, 81 Nev. 606 , 407 P.2d 721 (1965); Kline v. Robinson, 83 Nev. 244 , 428 P.2d 190 (1967). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Kline v. Robinson
green
2 sentences1970On review, this court must apply the same standard. [Citations.] “. . .If the facts are disputed or if reasonable men could draw different inferences from the facts, the question is one of fact for the jury and not one of law for the court.” See also Nichter v. Edmiston, 81 Nev. 606 , 407 P.2d 721 (1965); Kline v. Robinson, 83 Nev. 244 , 428 P.2d 190 (1967). 1970On review, this court must apply the same standard. [Citations.] “. . .If the facts are disputed or if reasonable men could draw different inferences from the facts, the question is one of fact for the jury and not one of law for the court.” See also Nichter v. Edmiston, 81 Nev. 606 , 407 P.2d 721 (1965); Kline v. Robinson, 83 Nev. 244 , 428 P.2d 190 (1967). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
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.