Document Type
Article
Publication Date
6-22-2017
Case Synopsis
The court held that future medical expenses are a category of damages to which NRCP 16.1(a)(1)(C)’s computation requirement applies, and that a plaintiff is not absolved of complying with NRCP 16.1(a)(1)(C) simply because the plaintiff’s treating physician has indicated in medical records that future medical care is necessary.
Recommended Citation
Hart, Andrew, "Pizarro-Ortega v. Cervantes-Lopez, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 37 (June 22, 2017)" (2017). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1052.
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/nvscs/1052