NRS
1.225 Grounds and procedure for disqualifying Supreme Court justices
and judges of the Court of Appeals.
1. A justice of the Supreme Court or a
judge of the Court of Appeals shall not act as such in an action or proceeding
when the justice or the judge entertains actual bias or prejudice for or
against one of the parties to the action.
2. A justice of the Supreme Court or a
judge of the Court of Appeals shall not act as such in an action or proceeding
when implied bias exists in any of the following respects:
(a) When the justice or the judge is a party to
or interested in the action or proceeding.
(b) When the justice or the judge is related to
either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree.
(c) When the justice or the judge has been
attorney or counsel for either of the parties in the particular action or
proceeding before the court.
(d) When the justice or the judge is related to
an attorney or counselor for either of the parties by consanguinity or affinity
within the third degree.
3. A justice of the Supreme Court or a
judge of the Court of Appeals, upon his or her own motion, may disqualify
himself or herself from acting in any matter upon the ground of actual or
implied bias.
4. Any party to an action or proceeding
seeking to disqualify a justice of the Supreme Court or a judge of the Court of
Appeals for actual or implied bias shall file a charge in writing, specifying
the facts upon which such disqualification is sought. Hearing on such charge
shall be had before the other justices of the Supreme Court or, if the charge
concerns a judge of the Court of Appeals, the justices of the Supreme Court.
5. Upon the disqualification of:
(a) A justice of the Supreme Court pursuant to
this section, a judge of the Court of Appeals or a district judge shall be
designated to sit in place of the justice as provided in Section 4 of Article 6 of the
Constitution of the State of Nevada.
(b) A judge of the Court of Appeals pursuant to
this section, a district judge shall be designated to sit in place of the judge
as provided in Section 4 of Article 6
of the Nevada Constitution.
6. No person shall be punished for
contempt for making, filing or presenting a charge for disqualification
pursuant to subsection 4.
(Added to NRS by 1957,
521; A 2013,
1710)
Notes of Decisions
Ainsworth v. Combined Ins. Co. of Am., 774 P.2d 1003 (Nev. 1989).
· cites it 26× “225, he entertained a disqualifying bias or prejudice for and against the litigants and their counsel; (2) under the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, his impartiality was reasonably and sufficiently subject to question so as to create a disqualifying appearance of impropriety;…”
Whitehead v. Nevada Comm'n on Jud. Discipline, 873 P.2d 946 (Nev. 1994).
· cites it 16× “auditor asserted a due process claim alleging that Illinois Supreme Court had improperly limited auditor's jurisdiction to conduct audit of state court, the federal court ruled that "it is certain that the due process clause does not confer on [the state auditor] a right to…”
Goldman v. Bryan, 764 P.2d 1296 (Nev. 1988).
· cites it 7× “Second, appellant asserts that Justice Young should be disqualified for actual bias and prejudice pursuant to the provisions of NRS 1.225 and the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3.”
City of Las Vegas Downtown Redevelopment Agency v. Hecht, 940 P.2d 134 (Nev. 1997).
· cites it 6× “NRS 1.225 requires that: 1. A justice of the supreme court shall not act as such in an action or proceeding when he entertains actual bias or prejudice for or against one of the parties to the action.”
Matter of Dunleavy, 769 P.2d 1271 (Nev. 1989).
· cites it 4× “” See NRS 1.225; Nev. Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3.”
Snyder v. Viani, 916 P.2d 170 (Nev. 1996).
· cites it 8× “In that case, Justices Steffen and Springer joined in determining that a motion to disqualify them was untimely, without merit, and insufficient as a matter of law to warrant a formal hearing under NRS 1.225(4). Id. at 422-29 , 873 P.2d at 972-77 .”
State Bar of Nevada v. Claiborne, 756 P.2d 464 (Nev. 1988).
· cites it 2× “If Bar Counsel had done so, of course, I would have been afforded a chance to present my views in a public hearing, held openly pursuant to NRS 1.225(4). No motion for disqualification has ever been filed.”
State v. Allen, 2010 WI 10 (Wis. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 1.225 (4) (2009). *458 ¶ 184.”
Mirin v. Justices of the Supreme Court of Nevada, 415 F. Supp. 1178 (D. Nev. 1976).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff also complains that he had filed an Affidavit of Prejudice against all five Justices of the Nevada Supreme Court before the hearing was held in camera on the Stay Order but that there was never a hearing held on his Affidavit of Prejudice, although Plaintiff contends…”
Valley Health Sys., LLC v. Murray (Nev. 2023).
· cites it 12× “225(5)(a),1 which provides that [u]pon the disqualification of [a] justice of the Supreme Court under this section, a judge of the 1NRS 1.225 provides for t.he disqualification of a justice for actual or implied bias and provides in subsection 3 that "[a] justice of the Supreme…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(2) — 1 case
Goldman v. Bryan, 764 P.2d 1296 (Nev. 1988).
“Second, appellant asserts that Justice Young should be disqualified for actual bias and prejudice pursuant to the provisions of NRS 1.225 and the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(2)(a) — 1 case
Ainsworth v. Combined Ins. Co. of Am., 774 P.2d 1003 (Nev. 1989).
“225, he entertained a disqualifying bias or prejudice for and against the litigants and their counsel; (2) under the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, his impartiality was reasonably and sufficiently subject to question so as to create a disqualifying appearance of impropriety;…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(3) — 3 cases
Valley Health Sys., LLC v. Murray (Nev. 2023).
“225(5)(a),1 which provides that [u]pon the disqualification of [a] justice of the Supreme Court under this section, a judge of the 1NRS 1.225 provides for t.he disqualification of a justice for actual or implied bias and provides in subsection 3 that "[a] justice of the Supreme…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(4) — 7 cases
Whitehead v. Nevada Comm'n on Jud. Discipline, 873 P.2d 946 (Nev. 1994).
“auditor asserted a due process claim alleging that Illinois Supreme Court had improperly limited auditor's jurisdiction to conduct audit of state court, the federal court ruled that "it is certain that the due process clause does not confer on [the state auditor] a right to…”
Snyder v. Viani, 916 P.2d 170 (Nev. 1996).
“In that case, Justices Steffen and Springer joined in determining that a motion to disqualify them was untimely, without merit, and insufficient as a matter of law to warrant a formal hearing under NRS 1.225(4). Id. at 422-29 , 873 P.2d at 972-77 .”
State Bar of Nevada v. Claiborne, 756 P.2d 464 (Nev. 1988).
“If Bar Counsel had done so, of course, I would have been afforded a chance to present my views in a public hearing, held openly pursuant to NRS 1.225(4). No motion for disqualification has ever been filed.”
Matter of Dunleavy, 769 P.2d 1271 (Nev. 1989).
“” See NRS 1.225; Nev. Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3.”
Ainsworth v. Combined Ins. Co. of Am., 774 P.2d 1003 (Nev. 1989).
“225, he entertained a disqualifying bias or prejudice for and against the litigants and their counsel; (2) under the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, his impartiality was reasonably and sufficiently subject to question so as to create a disqualifying appearance of impropriety;…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(5) — 3 cases
Valley Health Sys., LLC v. Murray (Nev. 2023).
“225(5)(a),1 which provides that [u]pon the disqualification of [a] justice of the Supreme Court under this section, a judge of the 1NRS 1.225 provides for t.he disqualification of a justice for actual or implied bias and provides in subsection 3 that "[a] justice of the Supreme…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.225(5)(a) — 3 cases
Valley Health Sys., LLC v. Murray (Nev. 2023).
“225(5)(a),1 which provides that [u]pon the disqualification of [a] justice of the Supreme Court under this section, a judge of the 1NRS 1.225 provides for t.he disqualification of a justice for actual or implied bias and provides in subsection 3 that "[a] justice of the Supreme…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.