Legal Opinion

Scrimer v. Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 2000No. 33367, 34863PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

These two writ petitions raise important issues under NRCP 4(i), which requires a plaintiff to serve a summons and complaint within 120 days of the date that the complaint is filed unless the plaintiff can show good cause why the complaint was not timely served. Docket No. 33367 is a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order granting the real party in interest’s motion to quash service of process under NRCP 4(i) for failure to effect timely service. Docket No. 34863 is a petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging a district court order denying…

3Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Round Hill General Improvement District v. NewmanNevada Supreme Court · 1981
  2. Smith v. Eighth Judicial District Court of State of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State ex rel. Department of Transportation v. ThompsonNevada Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Hotel Last Frontier Corp. v. Frontier Properties, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Kahn v. OrmeNevada Supreme Court · 1992

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by30 opinions

  1. Saavedra-Sandoval v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Holmes v. Coast Transit AuthorityMississippi Supreme Court · 2002
  3. International Game Technology, Inc. v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. County of WashoeNevada Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Moseley v. Eighth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Arnold v. KipNevada Supreme Court · 2007

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API