Tuesday, March 30, 2021-Las Vegas-Court of Appeals
81070-COA CHAUDHERY VS. STATE, DEP'T OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVS.
Docket Number: 81070-COA
Las Vegas - 1:30 P.M. - Court of Appeals
This is an appeal from a district court order denying a petition for judicial review. This appeal arises from sanctions filed against appellant, a pediatrician, and her practice, by respondent, Nevada Health and Human Services (NHHS) based upon appellant’s alleged failure to disclose prior misdemeanor criminal convictions.
ISSUES:
The issues on appeal are whether: (1) Nevada Medicaid acted arbitrarily and capriciously by terminating and issuing tier 3 sanctions against Chaudhery, and (2) Nevada Medicaid abused its discretion by terminating Chaudhery’s professional corporation and issuing tier 1 sanctions.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Court of Appeals. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties.
80548-COA Byrd vs. Byrd
Docket Number: 80548-COA
Las Vegas - 2:30 P.M. - Court of Appeals
This is an appeal from a special order after judgment in a family law matter.
ISSUES:
The issues on appeal are whether the district court abused its discretion when it (1) determined that the divorce decree was vague and ambiguous with regard to both the mortgage assistance payment and the military payment provisions; (2) considered extrinsic evidence to determine the parties’ intent; (3) determined that appellant breached his fiduciary duty to respondent by misrepresenting income and assets; (4) awarded respondent alimony based on her demonstrated need in an amount commensurate with what appellant promised in the decree; (5) determined that respondent timely sought to set aside the decree; (6) determined the decree was unconscionable and unenforceable given the length of the marriage and appellant's misrepresentations; and (7) denied appellant's request to appear by audio visual equipment due to his allegedly ailing health.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Court of Appeals. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties.