Legal Opinion

McGinnis v. Consolidated Casinos Corp.

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1978No. 9246PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

Appellants sought damages allegedly resulting from respondents’ negligence. Respondents moved for summary judgment contending a common law negligence action was barred by NRS 616.270. 1 The district court ordered that the motion be treated as a motion to dismiss and granted the motion with leave to appellants to file an amended complaint.

Appellants subsequently filed an amended complaint alleging that Mary Ann McGinnis, an employee at the Mint Hotel, had completed her shift at the Mint and clocked out; after visiting with some friends, Mary went to the employees’ locker room in the…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McColl v. SchererNevada Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Nevada Industrial Commission v. HoltNevada Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Heitman v. Bank of Las VegasNevada Supreme Court · 1971

4Cited by8 opinions

  1. Wasilchuk v. Harvey's Wagon Wheel, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 1985
  2. McGinnis v. CONSOLIDATED CASINOS CORPORATIONNevada Supreme Court · 1982
  3. McGinnis v. Consolidated Casinos Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1981
  4. SIT v. Tulsa Turbine Engines & Aircraft, LLCCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
  5. Flint Vs. Franktown Meadows, Inc. C/W 74728Nevada Supreme Court · 2019

3 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