Wrongful Termination

Elements

Sub-categories

• Breach of continued employment contract
• Bad faith discharge
• Tortious discharge
• Tortious constructive discharge

Example Cases

Proof

Damages

Defenses

Misc

Strict Liability

Elements

Sub-categories

• Ultra-hazardous or abnormally dangerous activities
• Products liability

Example Cases

Proof

Damages

Defenses

Misc

Negligence

General

"In Nevada, there are two types of liens an attorney may hold to ensure that clients pay their attorney's fees: (1) a special or charging lien on the judgment or settlement the attorney has obtained for the client, NRS 18.015(1); Morse v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 65 Nev. 275, 281, 195 P.2d 199, 202 (1948); and

(2) a general or retaining lien that entitles an attorney, if discharged by the client, to retain the client's papers, property or money until a court, at the request of the client, requires the attorney to deliver the retained items upon the client's furnishing of payment or security for the attorney's fees.Morse v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 65 Nev. 275, 281, 286, 195 P.2d 199, 202, 204"
Figliuzzi v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In and For County of Clark, 111 Nev. 338, 342, 890 P.2d 798, 801 (1995).

Elements

• Special or Charging Liens:
  • A client places a claim, demand or cause of action (including a claim for unliquidated damages) into the hands of an attorney for suit or collection
  • The attorney successfully obtains a judgment, settlement, collection, ect., for the client
  • The attorney then has a lien on the proceeds of the judgment, settlement, or collection for:
    • The amount of the fee agreed upon by the client and attorney, or
    • If no fee agreement exists, for the reasonable value of the attorney's services

NRS 18.015.

• General or Retaining Liens:
  • A client retains an attorney
  • The client discharges the attorney
  • The attorney then has a passive lien on any of the client's property in his possession, papers, property or money.
  • The client can force the return of his property by petitioning the court and volunteering payment or security for the attorney's fees
    Figliuzzi v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In and For County of Clark, 111 Nev. 338, 342, 890 P.2d 798, 801 (1995).

Example Cases

Figliuzzi v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In and For County of Clark, 111 Nev. 338, 342, 890 P.2d 798, 801 (1995).

Morse v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 65 Nev. 275, 821, 195 P.2d 199, 202 (1948).

NRS 65.275

Proof

Damages

Defenses

• NRS 18.015 is inapplicable to purely inter-attorney disputes which are not predicated on an attorney/client fee agreement.
  Harvey L. Lerer, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In and For Harvey L. Lerer, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court In and For County of Clark, 111 Nev. 1165, 901 P.2d 643 (1995).

• An attorney's lien does not attach to assets awarded in a divorce decree that are exempt from execution by creditors. NRS 21.090(1)(s) provides that alimony is exempt from execution.
  Bero-Wachs v. Law Office of Logar & Pulver, 123 Nev. 71, 157 P.3d 704, 705 (2007).

• An attorney's lien are unenforceable after the consent judgment is entered in the malpractice case involving the same underlying case as the lien.
  Van Cleave v. Osborne, Jenkins & Gamboa, Chtd., 108 Nev. 885, 840 P.2d 589 (1992).

Misc

• An attorney at law shall have a lien upon any claim, demand or cause of action, including any claim for unliquidated damages, which has been placed in his hands by a client for suit or collection, or upon which a suit or other action has been instituted. The lien is for the amount of any fee which has been agreed upon by the attorney and client. In the absence of an agreement, the lien is for a reasonable fee for the services which the attorney has rendered for the client on account of the suit, claim, demand or action.
  NRS 18.015.

• We further conclude that when a client enters into an independent retainer agreement with a forensic accountant for accounting services in furtherance of the client's litigation, the attorney is not responsible for the accountant's fees under the principal theory enunciated in Molezzo, and the attorney cannot claim the forensic accountant's unpaid fees as costs in his attorney's lien.
  Bero-Wachs v. Law Office of Logar & Pulver, 123 Nev. 71, 157 P.3d 704, 709 (2007).

• The attorney's right is not based upon (or limited to) his lien. It is based upon contract express or implied. The lien, as is true of other forms of lien, is but security for his right. To hold that an attorney's right to compensation is limited to his lien rights is in effect to deprive him of any right to contract for other than a contingent fee, since no fee contract could ever be enforced save in event of a successful recovery to which a lien might attach.
  Gordon v. Stewart, 74 Nev. 115, 117, 324 P.2d 234, 235 (1958).

Nevada's Theories of Liability

This section is a work-in-progress attempt to provide a basic reference for litigators looking for a starting point in analyzing their cases.  

Also, there are two new formating issues that have come to my attention. First, a glitch in the software has caused some of my articles to lose their formating.  Second, Google has instituted a block on all popups containing their site.  So I have lost my citations to Google Scholar.  I am working on fixing these issues.

Wrongful Use of a Computer

Elements

The text of NRS 205.4765et seq is far to large for the purposes of this summary. It suffices to say that, in general, it is unlawful to use/take/publish/access/destroy (etc.) data on a computer without authorization

1. data, a program or any supporting documents which exist inside or outside a computer, system or network NRS 205.4675(1)
2. equipment or supplies that are used or intended to be used in a computer, system or network NRS 205.4675(2)
3. a computer, system or network a device used to access a computer, network or data NRS 205.4675(3)
4. a device used to access a computer, network or data NRS 205.4675(4)

OR

5. cause to be introduced or attempt to introduce a computer contaminant into a computer, system or network NRS 205.4675(5)

[Editor's Note: Please note that this list is abbreviated as to the elements of individual causes of action and is not an exhaustive list of causes of action listed in NRS 205.473 et seq. Please refer directly to the statute for more guidance.]

Example Cases

Proof

Damages

NRS 205.511 Victim authorized to bring civil action.

1. Any victim of a crime described in NRS 205.473 to 205.513, inclusive, may bring a civil action to recover:

(a) Damages for any response costs, loss or injury suffered as a result of the crime;

(b) Punitive damages; and

(c) Costs and reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in bringing the civil action.

2. A victim of a crime described in NRS 205.473 to 205.513, inclusive, may bring a civil action pursuant to this section whether or not the person who committed the crime is or has been charged with or convicted or acquitted of the crime or any other offense arising out of the facts surrounding the crime.

3. The provisions of this section do not abrogate or limit the right of a victim of a crime described in NRS 205.473 to 205.513, inclusive, to bring a civil action pursuant to any other statute or the common law.

(Added to NRS by 1999, 2706; A 2001, 1244)

Defenses

Misc

Wrongful Foreclosure

Elements

An action for the tort of wrongful foreclosure will lie if the trustor or mortgagor can establish that at the time the power of sale was exercised or the foreclosure occurred, no breach of condition or failure of performance existed on the mortgagor's or trustor's part which would have authorized the foreclosure or exercise of the power of sale.
Collins v. Union Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 99 Nev. 284, 662 P.2d 610, 623 (Nev.1983)

Example Cases

Proof

• Plaintiff must affirmatively plead that he is not in breach

Plaintiffs' claim for wrongful foreclosure falls short because they have failed to allege that they were not in default on their loan obligations when Defendant initiated the foreclosureproceedings. Although Plaintiffs claim that Defendants' actions were fraudulent, malicious, and oppressive, Plaintiffs do not affirmatively allege that they breached no condition of the mortgage agreement sufficient to permit foreclosure proceedings against them. Thus, the Court dismisses Plaintiffs' claim for wrongful foreclosure.
Larson v. Homecoming Financial, LLC, 680 F.Supp.2d 1230, 1237 (D. Nev. 2009).

Damages

Defenses

Misc

Wrongful Death

Elements

Example Cases

Proof

Damages

Defenses

Misc