Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gypsum Resources, LLC, A Nevada Limited Liability Company v. Catherine Cortez Masto

October 31, 2011

GYPSUM RESOURCES, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEVADA AND HER AGENTS AND SUCCESSORS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND DAVID ROGER; COUNTY OF CLARK; BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF CLARK, DEFENDANTS.



D.C. No. 2:05-cv-00583-RCJ-LRL District of Nevada, Las Vegas

FOR PUBLICATION

ORDER CERTIFYING QUESTIONS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

Before: Richard A. Paez, Marsha S. Berzon, and Carlos T. Bea, Circuit Judges.

Certification Order

Pursuant to Nevada Rule of Appellate Procedure 5, we respectfully certify questions to the Nevada Supreme Court. The answer to these questions will be determinative of the matter pending before this court, and there is no clearly controlling precedent in the decisions of the Nevada Supreme Court.

Submission of this case is vacated and all further proceedings are stayed pending receipt of an answer to the certified questions. The parties shall notify the Clerk of this court within one week after the Nevada Supreme Court accepts or rejects the certified questions, and again within one week after the Nevada Supreme Court renders its answers.

As further explained below, we respectfully certify the following questions to the Nevada Supreme Court:

1. Does Nevada Senate Bill No. 358 (Act of May 19, 2003, ch. 105, 2003 Nev. Stat. 595) ("SB 358") violate article IV, § 20 of the Nevada Constitution?

2. Does SB 358 violate article IV, § 21 of the Nevada Constitution?

3. Does SB 358 violate article IV, § 25 of the Nevada Constitution?

4. If SB 358 would otherwise violate article IV, sections 20, 21, or 25 of the Nevada Constitution, does it fall within an applicable exception and so remain valid?

We recognize that the Nevada Supreme Court may rephrase the question as it deems necessary. Palmer v. Pioneer Inn Assocs. Ltd., 59 P.3d 1237, 1238 (Nev. 2002) (rephrasing and answering our certified question).

Summary and Facts

Defendant-Appellant Catherine Cortez Masto, in her official capacity as Attorney General for the State of Nevada, appeals to this court from an order by the district court granting a motion for partial summary judgment filed by Plaintiff-Appellee Gypsum Resources, LLC ("Gypsum"), and denying Appellant's cross-motion for partial summary judgment on the same issues. ER 4-32. The district court held that SB 358 is unconstitutional under article IV, §§ 20, 21, and 25 of the Nevada Constitution.*fn1 Gypsum's remaining claims, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.