08202017Headline:

Reno, Nevada

HomeNevadaReno

Email Steven J. Klearman Steven J. Klearman on Twitter Steven J. Klearman on Facebook Steven J. Klearman on Avvo
Steven J. Klearman
Steven J. Klearman
Attorney • (800) 880-5297

Understanding the Importance of the Elements of Nevada Legal Theories

Comments Off

As I said last blog, I plan to provide in-depth information on Nevada civil law in general, and the elements of Nevada legal theories in particular, in many future blogs. Much of this legal research is extracted from the Second Edition of my first book, Elements of Nevada Legal Theories.

Nevada is a notice pleading jurisdiction. This means that civil complaints in Nevada can be pleaded rather loosely as long as they ensure that an opposing party is put on notice of the legal theories upon which a party is proceeding.

The Nevada Supreme Court has long held that pleadings will be liberally construed to place matters into issue which are fairly noticed to the adverse party. Pittman v. Lower Court Counseling, 110 Nev. 359, 871 P.2d 953 (1994).

The test for whether allegations in a complaint are sufficient to assert a claim for relief is whether the allegations give fair notice of the nature and the basis of a legally sufficient claim and the corresponding relief requested. Vacation Village v. Hitachi America, 110 Nev. 481, 874 P.2d 744 (1994). While the rules for pleading in Nevada are liberal, it is nevertheless essential to thoroughly understand the elements of recognized legal theories, preferably early in a case, since such elements constitute a framework for discovery, a blueprint for proof at trial, and an aid in the formulation of jury instructions.

Such elements also ensure that a complaint is properly drafted and answered.

And so, without further ado, I’ll start my next blog with the elements of negligence claims in Nevada with special attention to fact scenarios that the Nevada Supreme Court has discussed in this context.