251 P.3d 163
Nev.2011Background
- Landreth and Malik cohabited from 2001 to 2004; they were never married and had no children.
- Malik filed a family court action in Sept. 2006 seeking half equity in a Las Vegas home and other property; Landreth was served Oct. 4, 2006.
- Malik granted Landreth multiple extensions to answer; on Dec. 14, 2006 Malik served a notice of intent to default.
- Default was entered Feb. 27, 2007; Landreth answered and counterclaimed Mar. 5, 2007; a default hearing was set for Mar. 22, 2007.
- Landreth argued Malik violated RPC 3.5A and Rowland by not providing a second notice after later extensions; the district court denied Landreth’s motion to set aside the default.
- The family court entered default judgment favoring Malik, holding the up-front down payment came from a joint account; Landreth appealed challenging jurisdiction and notice compliance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Legislature may limit district judges in the family court | Landreth: Legislature cannot limit constitutional powers of family court judges. | Malik: Legislature may establish and limit the family court’s jurisdiction. | Legislature may establish but cannot limit district judges’ constitutional powers |
| Whether the family court abused discretion by denying set aside due to notice | Landreth: Malik failed to provide a second notice after extensions, violating RPC 3.5A/Rowland. | Malik: no requirement for a second notice after extensions. | Court abused discretion; required second notice after extensions to seek default |
Key Cases Cited
- Rowland v. Lepire, 95 Nev. 639 (Nev. 1979) (notice to opposing party's intent before default)
- State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Sleeper, 100 Nev. 267 (Nev. 1984) (void if court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction)
- Sealed Unit Parts v. Alpha Gamma Ch., 99 Nev. 641 (Nev. 1983) (abuse of discretion standards for default)
- Kahn v. Orme, 108 Nev. 510 (Nev. 1992) (default judgment standards and notice concerns)
- Barelli v. Barelli, 113 Nev. 873 (Nev. 1997) (supplemental/related issues within family-law matters)
- Mainor v. Nault, 120 Nev. 750 (Nev. 2004) (concurrent/coextensive jurisdiction concepts with family court)
- We the People Nevada v. Secretary of State, 124 Nev. 874 (Nev. 2008) (constitutional interpretation harmonization)
- Strickland v. Waymire, 126 Nev. _ (Nev. 2010) (ballot/constitutional amendment context and interpretation)