NRS
125A.335 Temporary emergency jurisdiction.
1. A court of this state has temporary
emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has
been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because
the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened
with mistreatment or abuse.
2. If there is no previous child custody
determination that is entitled to be enforced pursuant to the provisions of
this chapter and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court
of a state having jurisdiction pursuant to NRS
125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325, a child custody determination
made pursuant to this section remains in effect until an order is obtained from
a court of a state having jurisdiction pursuant to NRS 125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325. If a child custody proceeding
has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction
pursuant to NRS 125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325, a child custody determination
made pursuant to this section becomes a final determination, if it so provides,
and this state becomes the home state of the child.
3. If there is a previous child custody
determination that is entitled to be enforced pursuant to the provisions of
this chapter, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a
state having jurisdiction pursuant to NRS
125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325, any order issued by a court of
this state pursuant to this section must specify in the order a period that the
court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an
order from the state having jurisdiction pursuant to NRS 125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325. The order issued in this state
remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the
period specified or the period expires.
4. A court of this state which has been
asked to make a child custody determination pursuant to this section, upon
being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a
child custody determination has been made by, a court of a state having
jurisdiction pursuant to NRS 125A.305,
125A.315 and 125A.325, shall immediately communicate
with the other court. A court of this state which is exercising jurisdiction
pursuant to NRS 125A.305, 125A.315 and 125A.325, upon being informed that a
child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody
determination has been made by, a court of another state pursuant to a statute
similar to this section shall immediately communicate with the court of that
state to resolve the emergency, protect the safety of the parties and the
child, and determine a period for the duration of the temporary order.
(Added to NRS by 2003,
995)
Notes of Decisions
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
· cites it 10× “: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
· cites it 5× “: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
In Re: Guardianship of Meza (Nev. 2015).
· cites it 4× “" NRS 'The cases that appellant relies on to limit the district court's jurisdiction under NRS 125A.335 are inapposite because, unlike the present case, they involve existing child custody orders.”
Meeks v. Wright (Child Custody) (Nev. 2014).
“Rather, the child had only resided in Nevada for three months and California had become the child's home state within the past six months because he had resided there for ten months before his removal to Nevada. Further, Nevada was unable to exercise temporary emergency…”
Ciausova v. Dist. Ct. (Ciausov) (Nev. 2015).
“Given the circumstances of this case, we find unpersuasive petitioner's arguments that the district court should have retained temporary jurisdiction under NRS 125A.335 to resolve the custody issues.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125A.335(1) — 4 cases
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
“: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
Meeks v. Wright (Child Custody) (Nev. 2014).
“Rather, the child had only resided in Nevada for three months and California had become the child's home state within the past six months because he had resided there for ten months before his removal to Nevada. Further, Nevada was unable to exercise temporary emergency…”
In Re: Guardianship of Meza (Nev. 2015).
“" NRS 'The cases that appellant relies on to limit the district court's jurisdiction under NRS 125A.335 are inapposite because, unlike the present case, they involve existing child custody orders.”
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
“: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125A.335(2) — 3 cases
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
“: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
In Re: Guardianship of Meza (Nev. 2015).
“" NRS 'The cases that appellant relies on to limit the district court's jurisdiction under NRS 125A.335 are inapposite because, unlike the present case, they involve existing child custody orders.”
In Re: Guardianship of N.M., 2015 NV 75 (Nev. 2015).
“: NRS 125A.335 establishes a district court's temporary emergency jurisdiction to protect a child in Nevada from mistreatment or SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A el.”
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.