August 5, 2025, Oral Arguments
State, Comm’t of Ins. Vs. Chur c/w 85728/85907/87367
Carson City – 1:30 p.m. – Full Court
Clark Cnty. School Dist. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Angalia B.)
Carson City – 2:30 p.m. – Full Court
State, Comm’r of Ins. Vs. Chur c/w 85728/85907/87367
Docket No. 85668
Carson City – 1:30 p.m. – Full Court
As receiver for insurer Lewis & Clark, the Commissioner of Insurance for the State of Nevada brought suit against the directors of Lewis & Clark and a reinsurance broker, U.S. RE Corporation. The Commissioner moved to amend their complaint to accommodate for the change in law outlined in this court’s decision in Chur v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 136 Nev. 68, 458 P.3d 336 (2020), which was denied by the district court. The Commissioner argues that the change in law justifies amendment and appeals the district court’s order denying so. Additionally, both the Commissioner and the directors appeal the district court’s orders related to their respective motions for attorney fees and costs.
Clark Cnty. School Dist. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Angalia B.)
Docket No. 89127
Carson City – 2:30 p.m. – Full Court
A designated Educational Decision Maker (EDM) requested any and all emails referencing a minor child from petitioner Clark County School District (CCSD). CCSD rejected this request, maintaining that it was not legally obligated to produce the emails because they were not “education records” under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The EDM then moved to join CCSD as a party to dependency proceedings for the child and to compel CCSD to provide the emails. The dependency court granted the motion, found that any emails referencing the child were “education records,” and ordered CCSD to produce them. CCSD has petitioned this court for writ relief requesting that the dependency court’s order be vacated .