Jon R. Collins

This case involves former spouses Edith and Graham Jones disputing enforcement of a 1963 New York separation agreement for alimony and child support after their Nevada divorce, where the agreement was never incorporated into the decree and survived as a contract. Edith sued for breach seeking arrears after Graham stopped payments and diverted some child support, while Graham raised defenses and counterclaims seeking to modify or void the agreement based on changed finances, alleged interference with visitation, and other grounds. The trial court granted partial relief by reducing future payments and applying trust funds but denied costs and fees. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded, ruling that the agreement must be enforced as a binding contract without court modification of its terms, that the prevailing party was entitled to mandatory costs, and that attorney's fees required reasoned consideration under the applicable statute including accrued interest.

family lawprocedure

This case involved a direct appeal by a 17-year-old minor from a juvenile court order certifying him to stand trial as an adult on an armed robbery charge under Nevada law. The lower court had reviewed a probation department investigation report covering the minor's background, prior record, and circumstances of the offense before holding a hearing and entering the certification order. The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the order, holding that the governing statute (NRS 62.080) was constitutional as it satisfied due process requirements outlined in Kent v. United States, that the order provided an adequate basis for review, and that challenges to the report's admissibility could not be raised for the first time on appeal. The court rejected arguments that the statute allowed arbitrary action or that the certification lacked sufficient findings.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved an appeal from a probate court order confirming the public auction sale of a deceased partner's interest in the Desert Cab Company partnership to third-party buyers, over objections from the surviving partner Peter Balaban and an unsuccessful bidder. The Nevada Supreme Court reversed the order and remanded for further proceedings, holding that under the Uniform Partnership Act the estate could sell only the deceased partner's share of profits and surplus as personal property, not specific partnership assets or the physical business itself, which vested in the surviving partner. The court reasoned that the lower court's sale improperly conflated partnership interests with tangible assets and failed to first require an accounting to determine any surplus value as of dissolution. It further held that an unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to object to sale confirmation under probate statutes, as only interested persons in the estate may do so.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedure

This case is an appeal from a first-degree murder conviction and death sentence in Nevada state court, arising from the 1968 stabbing death of Joan Ingram near a highway after her car broke down. The defendant, Anderson, was arrested in California on unrelated charges, made incriminating statements to police, and was later tried and convicted after delays due to counsel changes and an escape. The court affirmed the conviction, sentence, and denial of a new trial, holding that the defendant was not denied a speedy trial, that evidence including statements and a bayonet was properly admitted, that jury instructions and the excusal of a death-penalty-averse juror were not erroneous, and that the evidence supported the verdict.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved Jesse Jeremiah Lee’s conviction for possession of dangerous drugs after officers found seconal capsules hidden in his shoes following a car accident. Lee appealed on the ground that the evidence was obtained through an unconstitutional search and seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment because he had not been arrested and had not given valid consent. The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling that Lee’s peaceful and silent compliance with the officer’s request to remove his shoes amounted to voluntary consent and an intelligent waiver of his constitutional rights. The majority reasoned that the absence of any force, threat, objection, or resistance supported a finding of voluntariness by clear and convincing evidence.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved an independent candidate for Nevada governor whose certificate of candidacy was challenged for lacking sufficient valid signatures under state law requiring signers to add their place of residence. The trial court invalidated 97 signatures due to incomplete address information, but the Nevada Supreme Court reversed, holding that the signatures substantially complied with the statute because the information provided allowed verification of the signers' voter registration status. The court reasoned that the purpose of the residence requirement is verification, and substantial compliance suffices when that purpose is met, drawing on precedents from other jurisdictions favoring this approach over strict compliance. Consequently, the candidate's name was ordered to appear on the ballot.

elections