USA – NEVADA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Leon F Mead, Mead Law Group
• rules that apply to all cases; • rules that apply to civil cases; • rules that apply to criminal cases; • rules that apply to family court cases, such as guardianship, custody and divorce; and • rules that apply to probate and estate admin- istration cases. However, other Nevada judicial districts have no discovery commissioner and have a single set of local rules that apply to all cases, regardless of case type. By way of example, the Third Judicial District ‒ governing Lyon County and located in Yerington, Nevada ‒ has a total of 13 local rules, collectively known as the Rules of Practice for the Third Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada (TDCR). Only one of those 13 rules – TDCR 4 – includes the term “discovery” at all and it simply provides: “Failure of any coun- sel... to have complied in good faith with the rules governing pre-trial discovery procedures shall result in the court making such orders as deemed appropriate, including the imposition of appropriate sanctions.” Rule 2.34 of the NRCP outlines very detailed meet-and-confer requirements regarding discov- ery disputes in civil cases. The specific require- ments therein do not apply to criminal cases, probate cases, or other types of cases pending before the Eighth Judicial District, unless there is a separate rule applying those requirements to such cases. Indeed, the Eighth Judicial District’s local rules have extensive application to discov- ery generally – the word “discovery” appears 102 times. Sanctions Not Routinely Issued In some jurisdictions, counsel will routinely ask the court to issue sanctions against the other side in many instances. However, Nevada judg- es are reluctant to issue monetary sanctions
against attorneys in prosecuting or defending cases, regardless of the severity of the action conducted by the attorney. As such, although the threat of sanctions is still a tool in the litiga- tion arsenal, it is often not as effective as it is in other jurisdictions (or even as it is in Nevada’s federal courts). Deposition Behaviour of Counsel In Nevada, unlike some other states, the judici- ary strongly enforces the obligation of counsel to engage civilly with each other. The Eighth Judicial District recently issued an “Administra- tive Order Regarding Deposition Behavior No 22-08”, which was put together by the discovery commissioners and affirmed by the chief judge. Even though judges and discovery commission- ers in the Eighth Judicial District previously and consistently made it clear that attorneys must be civil and co-operate with each other during discovery in particular matters, the recent issu- ance of an administrative order on the subject demonstrates the seriousness of the issue. Administrative Order No 22-08 contains specific direction on the types of objections that are and are not appropriate to be made in depositions. It also contains general edicts, such as: “Counsel must behave professionally at all times during depositions; they must treat parties, other coun- sel, court reporters, videographers, interpreters, and others involved in any aspect of a deposition with civility and respect.” Trials When preparing a case for trial in Nevada, as when conducting pre-trial activities, counsel should always consult the local rules of the spe- cific trial court in order to ascertain the specific judge’s particular requirements. By way of exam- ple, exhibit requirements can vary. Some judges will want evidentiary notebooks prepared that
1499 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook