Okada v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 83 (Oct. 15, 2015)

The Court determined that (1) NRCP 30 generally governs the taking of depositions but does not set restrictions as to where the deposition must take place; and (2) while NRCP 30 generally limits depositions to “1 day of 7 hours,”NRCP 26(b)(2) sets for general considerations that district courts should take into account when determining whether the length of a depositions should deviate from the presumption one-day time frame

Poremba v. S. Nev. Paving; and S&C Claims Servs., Inc. 132 Nev. Ad. Op. 24 (April 7, 2016)

The Court considers an appeal from a district court order. The Court clarified that medical treatment is not the only expense on which a workers’ compensation claimant is permitted to exhaust his or her settlement funds. Reversed and remanded with instructions

Golightly & Vannah, PLLC v. TJ Allen, LLC, 132 Nev. Adv. Op. 41 (Jun. 2, 2016)

In order for attorneys working on a contingency basis to comply with NRS 18.015’s requirement of perfecting a lien before receiving the funds, the notice of the lien must disclose the agreed upon contingency percentage and also claim court costs and out-of-pocket costs advanced by the attorney in an amount to be determined