The attorneys at the Law Office of Hayes & Welsh are experienced litigators with litigation experience in Nevada district courts, justice courts, Nevada federal court and bankruptcy court. Most lawsuits involve discovery of documents and evidence from the other party. There are limits on discovery. It is important to retain a a law firm that understand these limits and restrictions. Several recent Nevada Supreme Court decisions have clarified some limits on discovery:
In The State of Nevada, Department of Taxation v. The Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, 136 Nev. ___, Adv. Op. 42, No. 80637 (July 9, 2020), the Nevada Supreme Court clarified the definition of “possession, custody, or control” under NRCP 16.1. The Court held that this definition encompasses physical possession of the documents, as well as legal control (the legal right to obtain the documents).
In Venetian Casino Resort, LLC v. The Eighth Judicial District Court, 136 Nev. ___, Adv. Op. 26, No. 79689-COA (May 14, 2020), the Nevada Court of Appeals held that NRCP 26(b)(1) requires that the district courts consider proportionality, in addition to relevance, when determining the scope of discovery. Additionally, NRCP 26(b)(1) outlines several factors for the courts to use regarding proportionality. Before entering a protective order under NRCP 26(c)(1), the district courts must analyze whether good cause for a protective order exists. The court should use the three part test articulated in In re Roman Catholic Archbishop of Portland in Or., 661 F.3d 417, 424 (9th Cir. 2011), to determine whether good cause exists.