October 8, 2025, Oral Arguments
Powers vs. Dist. Ct. (Bueno) (Civil) c/w 89532/89783/90645
Carson City – 11:00 a.m. – Full Court
North River Ins. Co. vs. James River Ins. Co. (NRAP 5)
Carson City – 1:00 p.m. – Full Court
Powers vs. Dist. Ct. (Bueno) (Civil) c/w 89532/89783/90645
Docket No. 89144
Carson City – 11:00 a.m. – Full Court
Petitioner Gabriel Powers and real party in interest Carlos Bueno were involved in a motor vehicle accident. Bueno allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury and claimed nearly $2 million in damages. The parties agreed to a neuropsychological exam but could not agree on the conditions imposed or whether NRCP 35 or NRS 629.260 controlled. The district court found that NRCP 35 controlled and ordered certain exam conditions. Powers now seeks writ relief. The primary issue is whether NRS 629.620 is constitutional.
North River Ins. Co. vs. James River Ins. Co. (NRAP 5)
Docket No. 89228
Carson City – 1:00 p.m. – Full Court
Appellant North River Insurance Co. (an excess insurer) and respondent James River Insurance Co. (a primary insurer) issued an insurance policy to their mutual insured. The insured was sued in Nevada state court and James River agreed to defend the suit. James River rejected three settlement offers at or below its $1 million policy limit. The case eventually settled for $5 million, with James River paying its policy limit and North River paying $4 million from its $10 million excess policy. North River sued James River in California federal court for equitable subrogation to recoup its $4 million. Relying on two unpublished Nevada cases, the federal district court determined that equitable subrogation was barred under Nevada law in these circumstances. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit certified a question to this court pursuant to NRAP 5: “Under Nevada law, can an excess insurer state a claim for equitable subrogation against a primary insurer where the underlying lawsuit settled within the combined policy limits of the insurers?”