Wednesday, June 12, 2019-Las Vegas- J. Hardesty, J. Stiglich, and J. Silver
City of Las Vegas vs. Dist. CT. (Branscomb)
Docket Number: 77872
Las Vegas - 10:30 A.M. - Southern Panel
Real party in interest, Branscomb, was involved in a multi-car accident in which his car struck the back of a stopped vehicle at a high rate of speed resulting in the death of a person. Branscomb was charged with vehicular manslaughter and failure to decrease speed and use due care. At the bench trial, Branscomb sought dismissal or an adverse inference based on the failure of the police officer to obtain black box information from a third car that was involved in the crash. The justice court denied the motion and Branscomb was convicted.
ISSUES:
On appeal, the district court reversed and remanded the matter for a new trial because it agreed with Branscomb that an adverse inference was warranted for police failure to collect evidence. The City brings this writ petition to challenge this ruling, as there is no appeal available.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do
Demaranville vs. Cannon Cochran Mgmt. Serv.’s, Inc.
Docket Number: 72737
Las Vegas - 11:00 A.M. - Southern Panel
This is an appeal and cross-appeal from a district court order granting in part and denying in part a petition for judicial review in a workers’ compensation matter before an administrative appeals officer. Appellant Laura DeMaranville is the wife of the decedent (Daniel DeMaranville) who was previously a police officer for the City of Reno for over 20 years. After retiring from the City, the decedent worked for a private security company up until his death in 2012. The decedent died after having gall bladder surgery and Ms. DeMaranville filed a claim for death benefits based on a determination that the he died from heart disease, which the parties dispute.
ISSUES:
At issue in this appeal is Ms. DeMaranville’s entitlement to monthly death benefits. Ms. DeMaranville argues that she is entitled to benefits that should be calculated based on what her husband was making with the private insurance company at the time of his death. Respondents, City of Reno and the Employers Insurance Company of Nevada, argue that the district court properly determined that even if Ms. DeMaranville is entitled to benefits, the amount must be calculated based on the decedent’s income from the City of Reno at the time of death, which was zero. The City of Reno also argues that Ms. DeMaranville is not entitled to any benefits because there is insufficient evidence that the decedent died from heart disease. The City of Reno also challenges the determination that it is responsible for any benefits because it was self-insured at the time of death, arguing the City’s insurer at the time of employment should be responsible.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do
MMAWC, LLC vs. Zion Wood OBI WAN TR.
Docket Number: 75596
Las Vegas - 1:00 P.M. - Southern Panel
MMAWC, LLC promotes mixed martial arts events across the United States. Zion Wood Obi Wan Trust is a member of MMAWC; Shawn Wright is a control person at Zion. In 2012, MMAWC and Vincent Hesser entered into a licensing agreement granting Hesser a license to use MMAWC’s WSOF brand outside of U.S. territory for mixed martial arts events and related business. Hesser thereafter assigned the licensing agreement to WSOF Global Ltd., of which Wright was a director. The aforementioned parties and other parties became embroiled in litigation, and in 2016 they signed a comprehensive settlement agreement that cross-referenced and reaffirmed the licensing agreement, as amended. The amended licensing agreement included an arbitration clause. Zion, WSOF Global, and Shawn Wright thereafter filed a complaint against MMAWC and other defendants connected to that corporation. MMAWC moved to dismiss the complaint and enforce the arbitration clause. The district court concluded that the arbitration agreement was invalid under NRS 597.995 and denied the motion.
ISSUES:
The issues on appeal are: (1) whether NRS 597.995 is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, (2) whether the district court’s application of NRS 597.995 violated the U.S. Constitution, (3) whether the district court erred by refusing to apply the Federal Arbitration Act, (4) whether NRS 597.995 is void for vagueness, (5) whether the district court erred by determining the arbitration provision was void under NRS 597.995; (6) whether nonparties to the licensing agreement are prohibited from enforcing that arbitration provision; and (7) whether claims between nonparties to the licensing agreement are subject to the arbitration provision.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do
Azucena (Jose) vs. State
Docket Number: 74071
Las Vegas - 1:30 P.M. - Southern Panel
Appellant Jose Azucena appeals his conviction on 39 counts of lewdness with a child under the age of 14, child abuse, neglect or endangerment, indecent exposure, sexual assault with a minor under 14 years of age, attempted lewdness with a child under the age of 14, and first-degree kidnapping.
ISSUES:
He raises a number of issues on appeal relating to judicial misconduct, judicial bias, prosecutorial misconduct, inadmissible evidence, sufficiency of evidence, and cumulative error. The State argues that the trial was conducted properly and that there were no reversible errors.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do
Manning (Juan) vs. State
Docket Number: 74982
Las Vegas - 2:00 P.M. - Southern Panel
This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction, pursuant to a jury verdict, of commission of a fraudulent act in a gaming establishment. A jury convicted Manning after hearing evidence that Manning added a $5 chip to his bet, after the cards had been dealt, while playing blackjack at a casino in Las Vegas.
ISSUES:
The district court sentenced Manning under the large habitual criminal statute to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 10 years, based on his multiple prior felony convictions. Manning now challenges his conviction and sentence.
Disclaimer:
This synopsis is intended to provide only general information about this case before the Nevada Supreme Court. It is not intended to be all-inclusive or reflect all positions of the parties. To access the documents that have been filed in this matter, type the docket number into the court’s case search page: https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseSearch.do