In a child custody case, the court of appeals clarified Nevada law by (1) defining “sole physical custody” as “a custodial arrangement where the child resides with only one parent and the noncustodial parent’s parenting time is restricted to no significant in-person parenting time” and outlining the considerations required for entering an order for sole physical custody; (2) directing district courts to retain substantive decision-making authority over custodial modifications and parenting time allocations; (3) reiterating that, in family law cases, being a prevailing party alone is not a sufficient basis for an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.010; and (4) clarifying when reassignment of a case to a different judge on remand is appropriate because of the requisite fairness demanded in ongoing child custody proceedings.
Cummings, Jefferson, "Roe v. Roe [State of Nevada], 139 Nev. Adv. Op. 21 (Jul. 27, 2023)" (2023). Nevada Supreme Court Summaries. 1584.