Justia Nevada Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

In May, 2008, Real-Party-In-Interest Roxanne Cagnina arrived at Centennial Hills Hospital for medical treatment. During her stay, she was allegedly sexually assaulted by a member of the hospital staff. She brought a civil suit against the staff member and his employer, Petitioner Valley Health System. During discovery, Cagnina sought to have Valley Health produce records of other incidents or complaints of improper conduct by employees or staff or others. Valley Health objected, and Cagnina filed a motion to compel a response. The motion was heard before a discovery commissioner who recommended to the trial court that Cagninaâs motion be granted. The court affirmed the commissionerâs recommendation, but Valley Health still objected. It sought a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court, arguing that the records were privileged, and that the district court erred by affirming the discovery commissionerâs recommendation to hand over the records. On review, the Supreme Court found that Valley Health failed to raise its privilege argument before the discovery commissioner. The Court dismissed Valley Healthâs application for a writ of mandamus, and affirmed the decision of the lower court.

In 1985, Appellant Eugene Donlan was sentenced to probation by a California court for lewd and lascivious behavior involving a child. He was required to register as a sex offender. In 2005, Appellant moved to Nevada. Appellant had regularly registered as a sex offender since moving to Nevada. Almost 25 years after his conviction, California terminated Appellantâs registration requirement. Appellant then petitioned the district court in Nevada to terminate his registration requirement here. After a hearing, the district court denied Appellantâs petition. Appellant argues on appeal that the district court abused its discretion in denying his petition. The Supreme Court concluded that the Full Faith and Credit Clause does not require Nevada to disregard its own mechanism for protecting its citizens just because California terminated its registration requirement. Accordingly, the Court affirmed the district courtâs order that denied Appellantâs petition to stop registering as a sex offender in Nevada.