Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 1 - JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT GENERALLY

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230

Grounds for disqualifying judges other than Supreme Court justices or judges of the Court of Appeals

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 1.230  Grounds for disqualifying judges other than Supreme Court justices or judges of the Court of Appeals.

      1.  A judge shall not act as such in an action or proceeding when the judge entertains actual bias or prejudice for or against one of the parties to the action.

      2.  A judge shall not act as such in an action or proceeding when implied bias exists in any of the following respects:

      (a) When the judge is a party to or interested in the action or proceeding.

      (b) When the judge is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree.

      (c) When the judge has been attorney or counsel for either of the parties in the particular action or proceeding before the court.

      (d) When the judge is related to an attorney or counselor for either of the parties by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree. This paragraph does not apply to the presentation of ex parte or uncontested matters, except in fixing fees for an attorney so related to the judge.

      3.  A judge, upon the judge’s own motion, may disqualify himself or herself from acting in any matter upon the ground of actual or implied bias.

      4.  A judge or court shall not punish for contempt any person who proceeds under the provisions of this chapter for a change of judge in a case.

      5.  This section does not apply to the arrangement of the calendar or the regulation of the order of business.

      [45:19:1865; A 1907, 25; 1927, 108; 1931, 247; 1937, 214; 1939, 255; 1931 NCL § 8407] + [45a:19:1865; added 1931, 247; 1931 NCL § 8407.01]—(NRS A 1957, 69; 1965, 551; 1969, 351; 1975, 608; 1977, 765)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 47 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case: Rivero v. Rivero
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rivero v. Rivero (2009) nev · cites it 15× “Rivero also contends that NRS 1.230, which prohibits punishment for contempt if a party alleges that a judge should be disqualified, prohibits an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.”
Ham v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC. (1977) nev · cites it 22× “His action was ineffectual. Had an order of disqualification been signed and entered by Respondent, prohibition would nonetheless have been available to Petitioner, since the judicial action would have been void and improvidently issued, as being in violation of NRS 1.”
CANARELLI v. DIST. CT. (CANARELLI) (2022) nev · cites it 10× “540 (1994), to govern disqualification under NRS 1.230, rather than Rule 2.11(A), based SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 440444 on the judges acquisition of allegedly "prejudicial information" from the current proceedings.”
Smith v. Eighth Judicial District Court (1991) nev “2d 910, 911 (1959); NRS 1.230. In Tarsey , this court held that pretrial rulings by one judge would not prevent a party from asserting the right to disqualify another judge to whom the matter is thereafter assigned for trial.”
Valladares v. Second Judicial District Court (1996) nev · cites it 8× “On March 2, 1995, eight minutes before Valladares’ arraignment was scheduled to begin, Valladares filed a motion to disqualify Judge Steinheimer under NRS 1.230, NRS 1.235, and Canon 3E of the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, alleging Steinheimer had an actual or apparent bias…”
Kirksey v. State (1996) nev “NRS 1.230 specifies grounds for the disqualification of judges other than supreme court justices: 1.”
Ivey v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark (2013) nev · cites it 2× “Judge Gonzalez hearing Luciaetta’s motion to reopen discovery did not violate Nevada law Luciaetta argues that if Judge Gonzalez’s disqualification is not required under the Due Process Clause, the district court should have disqualified Judge Gonzalez under more stringent…”
Libby v. State (1993) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 1.230(1) provides that "[a] judge 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.”
Roe v. Roe (2023) nevapp · cites it 2× “NRS 1.230(1). If a "judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned," then that judge should be disqualified.”
Towbin Dodge, LLC v. Eighth Judicial District Court (2005) nev “NRS 1.230 lists substantive grounds for disqualification, and NRS 1.”
Millen v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark (2006) nev “See also NRS 1.230 (listing grounds for disqualifying judges other than supreme court justices).”
In Re Discipline of Stuhff (1992) nev “NRS 1.230(3) allows a judge, upon his own motion, to disqualify himself from acting in any matter upon the ground of actual or implied bias.”
Show all 47 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(1) — 9 cases
Rivero v. Rivero (2009) nev “Rivero also contends that NRS 1.230, which prohibits punishment for contempt if a party alleges that a judge should be disqualified, prohibits an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.”
CANARELLI v. DIST. CT. (CANARELLI) (2022) nev “540 (1994), to govern disqualification under NRS 1.230, rather than Rule 2.11(A), based SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 440444 on the judges acquisition of allegedly "prejudicial information" from the current proceedings.”
Libby v. State (1993) nev “NRS 1.230(1) provides that "[a] judge 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.”
Roe v. Roe (2023) nevapp “NRS 1.230(1). If a "judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned," then that judge should be disqualified.”
Turner v. State (1998) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(2) — 1 case
Matter of Parental Rights as to Oren (1997) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(2)(c) — 1 case
Turner v. State (1998) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(3) — 2 cases
Ham v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC. (1977) nev “His action was ineffectual. Had an order of disqualification been signed and entered by Respondent, prohibition would nonetheless have been available to Petitioner, since the judicial action would have been void and improvidently issued, as being in violation of NRS 1.”
In Re Discipline of Stuhff (1992) nev “NRS 1.230(3) allows a judge, upon his own motion, to disqualify himself from acting in any matter upon the ground of actual or implied bias.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(4) — 3 cases
Rivero v. Rivero (2009) nev “Rivero also contends that NRS 1.230, which prohibits punishment for contempt if a party alleges that a judge should be disqualified, prohibits an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.”
Ham v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC. (1977) nev “His action was ineffectual. Had an order of disqualification been signed and entered by Respondent, prohibition would nonetheless have been available to Petitioner, since the judicial action would have been void and improvidently issued, as being in violation of NRS 1.”
Rivero v. Rivero (2008) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(5) — 11 cases
Ham v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC. (1977) nev “His action was ineffectual. Had an order of disqualification been signed and entered by Respondent, prohibition would nonetheless have been available to Petitioner, since the judicial action would have been void and improvidently issued, as being in violation of NRS 1.”
Johnson v. Goldman (1978) nev
Valladares v. Second Judicial District Court (1996) nev “On March 2, 1995, eight minutes before Valladares’ arraignment was scheduled to begin, Valladares filed a motion to disqualify Judge Steinheimer under NRS 1.230, NRS 1.235, and Canon 3E of the Nevada Code of Judicial Conduct, alleging Steinheimer had an actual or apparent bias…”
Cord v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada (1975) nev
State Ex Rel. Moore v. Fourth Judicial District Court (1961) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 1.230(7) — 1 case
State ex rel. McMahan v. First Judicial District Court (1962) nev
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.