Legal Opinion

McClintock v. McClintock

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 2006No. 42703PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By the Court,

Gibbons, J.:

In this appeal, we consider whether the district court may use a nunc pro tunc order to modify the date of a divorce decree. Because a nunc pro tunc order can only reflect that which was actually done, we conclude that the district court cannot use a nunc pro tunc order to change the date of a divorce decree to a date before the date when the matter was adjudicated. Since, in this case, the district court’s order changed the date of a divorce decree to a date before the district court adjudicated the matter, we reverse the order and remand for proceedings…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Day v. DayNevada Supreme Court · 1964
  2. Finley v. FinleyNevada Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Williams v. WilliamsNevada Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Koester v. Administrator of the Estate of KoesterNevada Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Thrash v. ThrashMississippi Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. MacK v. Estate of MacKNevada Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Seaton v. SeatonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API