- law dawg
- 22 Comments
- 2100 Views
- ACLU challenges Metro’s 287(g) immigration partnership with ICE. [TNI; Nevada Current; RJ]
- Nevada’s new public option health plans face a hurdle–insurance brokers. [TNI]
- Nevada eases rules on “buy now, pay later” loans. [Nevada Current]
- Reno’s Community Court closing after judge deems it unsuccessful. [2News]
- Police: CCSD bus driver at fault in crash that killed 12-year-old girl. [RJ; KTNV]
was the theory on that community court that if there was the…. i don’t know,, gravitas of the person going to the courthouse rather than just sent to a city center they might be more inclined towards embracing those resources?
I wonder why Reno is starting a women’s specialty court given the community court shuttering?
In your mind, is homelessness and domestic violence the same thing? Otherwise, why are you comparing community court to HER court?
I just was thinking it might warrant a root cause analysis before starting something else to take some lessons learned forward. It seems I’ve touched a nerve.
NV District Court CM/ECF down for anyone else? The other fed court sites are working .
yep – get a blank page when trying to go in for e-filing.
Is this really the North Las Vegas municipal court email address: ? Why is it a “.com” domain? That seems so shady. It doesn’t help that people are sending fake parking ticket scams. Verifying that domain is actually legit is a pain in the …
I wrote “https://www.cityofnorthlasvegas.com/” but that disappeared when I added the “” trying again (and don’t know how to edit)
Because CNLV is open for business to the highest brib– err, bidder?
Civil bench bar meetings are a joke.
the free CLE credit is not a joke
I do the ones that offer free CLE – otherwise, yes they are often a waste of time. This year I swear, I swear I won’t be doing 10 hours of CLE over the Thanksgiving weekend again, I swear.
Try NYE
at 2x-3X you can get all your CLE’s done in one day
This is one of the reasons everyone should join CCBA. They have lunch time learning CLE’s via ZOOM that are actually interesting and useful. You do those during the year and you’re all done, easy peasy.
I skimmed the article, but did it say that there was a 35% success rate with the homeless population? That’sa HUGE success with that population. Absolutely gigantic.
That’s awesome, but in reading that article, I was befuddled why it was called a “court” or handled by the municipal court.
Being in criminal – not in Reno granted – I do think that these people need some form of “coercive” guidance to get their lives back on track, so it does make some sense to have a court handle it. I don’t think incarceration is always the answer if they fail, but generally a lot of these people need some sort of carrot and stick system in place to keep them sober and working on some form of rehabilitation.
Civil Bench-Bar Meeting Report
October 14, 2025
Pro Bono Month Updates and Opportunities
The meeting opened with a focus on October’s Pro Bono Month, emphasizing the urgent need for volunteer attorneys. The Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada highlighted a pressing conflict case involving a five-month-old child removed from unsafe parental care. Attorneys were urged to accept such cases, with assurances of comprehensive support including training, mentorship, sample pleadings, and malpractice coverage. A notable upcoming CLE event will feature Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager and Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, providing legislative insights and a networking opportunity.
The Senior Law Program emphasized the increasing demand for pro bono services for clients aged sixty and older, noting the absence of income testing. Attorneys can participate in estate planning workshops and mobile healthcare power of attorney clinics. A pro bono recognition event will be held on October 22 at Queensridge.
Nevada Legal Services discussed its successful Champions of Justice Luncheon and announced plans for a 2026 civil law “Ask a Lawyer” program. This initiative aims to provide brief legal guidance on issues such as service of process and responding to complaints, thereby empowering self-represented litigants.
State Bar Legislative Process and Section-Sponsored Legislation
State Bar President Kari Stevens provided an overview of how bar sections may propose legislation relevant to their subject areas. Due to constitutional limitations under Keller v. State Bar of California, the State Bar itself cannot advocate for non-germane political or ideological positions. Proposed legislation must be approved by a section’s executive committee and membership before being submitted to the Board of Governors. The Board reviews proposals to determine if they are germane, decides whether to sponsor or oppose them, or may allow sections to proceed independently with appropriate disclaimers.
Arbitration and Short Trial Reform: Assembly Bill 3 (AB3)
Discovery Commissioner Gans presented significant changes under AB3, which will govern cases filed after January 1, 2026. The legislation raises the arbitration attorney’s fee cap from $3,000 to $15,000 and aligns it with short trial provisions. Costs and interest remain recoverable under statute, rule, or agreement. New automatic exemptions now include bad faith insurance claims with punitive damages, sexual assault or battery cases, and product liability actions.
To implement AB3, amendments to the Nevada Arbitration Rules and Short Trial Rules are required, including changes to thresholds, compensation, and fee-shifting provisions. These will be enacted through the Nevada Supreme Court’s administrative docket process (ADKT). The reforms aim to channel more personal injury cases valued at $100,000 or less into arbitration, increase settlement pressure through higher fee exposure, and enhance arbitrator participation through improved compensation.
Practical implications include expanded ADR participation, a higher volume of cases eligible for arbitration, and sustained exemptions for complex or sensitive matters. Historical data shows that 93% of arbitration cases resolve before a trial de novo, but participation in the program dropped from 60% of eligible cases in 2017 to 33% by 2024 due to rising litigation costs. AB3 seeks to restore participation levels closer to 50-60%.
Legislative Session Overview and Trends
Jason Frierson, former Assembly Speaker and legislative advisor, offered a comprehensive review of the 2025 session. Approximately 1,100 bills were introduced, with just over 600 passed and a record 87 vetoed, reflecting heightened political tensions. He cautioned attorneys to review legislative minutes and actual bill language rather than relying solely on digests, which often misrepresent final statutory provisions.
Several bills failed due to procedural issues or leadership decisions to table them. Others were vetoed, including AB 259 on negotiated Medicare/Medicaid rates and SB 303 regarding liability for recreational land use. Some bills were significantly amended or had key provisions deleted, such as SB 62 on private rights of action for bias crimes and SB 316 regulating pharmacy benefit managers.
Legislative successes relevant to civil practitioners included SB 329 requiring emergency responders to complete specialized training for individuals with cognitive impairments and SB 406 granting immunity to Nevada’s higher education system for actions taken during COVID-19. Additionally, AB 309 expanded protective order provisions for incarcerated individuals, and AB 381 increased penalties for animal cruelty.
Frierson emphasized the need for ongoing engagement with legislators before sessions begin. Because Nevada’s legislature meets biennially for 120 days, preparation during the interim period is critical to influencing outcomes and preventing unfavorable legislation from advancing.
Uber Litigation and Transportation Network Company (TNC) Agreement
Frierson discussed the resolution of litigation over a proposed Uber-related ballot initiative. The Nevada Supreme Court struck down the initiative, but subsequent negotiations between trial lawyers and TNCs produced a six-year “stand down” agreement and parity with taxi regulations regarding license suspension and deactivation procedures. Although such agreements are likely unenforceable, they reflect a commitment to good faith legislative collaboration.
Business Court Proposal and Judicial Selection Concerns
A resolution to establish a specialized business court sought to position Nevada as a more attractive jurisdiction for corporate litigation. However, the proposed appointment process—entirely appointive and involving legislators—raised separation-of-powers concerns. Frierson noted that this initiative could signal future attempts to move toward a merit-selection or Missouri Plan model for judicial appointments, potentially reducing the role of elections in judicial selection.
Special Session Outlook
A special legislative session is anticipated in mid-November 2025, expected to last less than a week. Likely agenda items include the governor’s crime bill, healthcare-related legislation, and noncontroversial bills that failed due to time constraints. Frierson cautioned that support for such bills may shift post-session, requiring renewed advocacy.
Conclusion
The October 14, 2025 Bench-Bar meeting provided critical updates on pro bono initiatives, legislative developments, arbitration reform, and evolving judicial and regulatory frameworks. Attorneys should prepare for significant changes to ADR practice beginning January 2026, remain engaged with legislative processes year-round, and anticipate additional legislative activity during the forthcoming special session. Active involvement in these developments will be essential to effectively representing clients and shaping Nevada’s civil justice landscape.
“including changes to thresholds, compensation, and fee-shifting provisions”
Fee increases for prevailing party, but more work for the Arbitrator with the old fee and fee cap in place. At least that’s what I understand.
“ enhance arbitrator participation through improved compensation.” seems pretty clear. Though I haven’t read whether arb fees are increased, so maybe this AI summary is wrong. I don’t participate in the program as an arbitrator, so I don’t care one way or the other. 8/10 attorneys, even the good ones, phone it in anyway. This ain’t gonna change that.
Thank you