Document Type

Case Summary

Publication Date


Case Synopsis

In a per curium opinion, the Nevada Supreme Court found an abuse of discretion in the lower court’s denial of an ex parte temporary guardianship petition. The considerations outlined in NRS 159A were not met, therefore, the lower court improperly denied the petition. NRS 159A.053(4) presumes that petitions for guardianship are in the best interest of the child under certain conditions. This presumption is rebuttable at any time, but an ex parte motion need not be denied merely because an opponent cannot rebut it before a decision is rendered. Further, NRS 159A.053(3) requires that an affidavit describing the emergency supports an ex parte petition for temporary guardianship. The lower court’s evaluation of the emergency here improperly relied on a misunderstanding of who filed the petition. For these reasons, the Court granted the petition for a writ of mandamus in part to reconsider the original petition for temporary guardianship.