Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.

Nevada Supreme Court

Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.

DecidedDecember 16, 2014

Docket66706

StatusUnpublished

This text of Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. (Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., (Neb. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

But in the absence of an established set of underlying facts, our answers to the certified questions will largely not be determinative of any part of the federal case and will potentially be of questionable precedential value. As a result, we conclude that our resolution of the certified questions is not appropriate under these circumstances, see Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc. v. Ricci, 122 Nev. 746, 137 P.3d 1161 (2006), and we therefore decline the certified questions in this case. In so doing, we make no comment on the merits of the certified questions, and our decision to decline these questions shall have no bearing on our decision to accept or decline a subsequent federal court's certification of questions presenting the issues raised here under circumstances more conducive to our consideration of these issues. It is so ORDERED.'

C.J. Gibbons

R rLjcering Hardesty

J. J. Parraguirre

, J. Cherry Saitta

'Having considered appellant's November 25, 2014, motion to set briefing schedule, we deny the motion.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) [947A eon cc: Hon. Gloria M. Navarro, United States District Court of Nevada Kravitz, Schnitzer & Johnson, Chtd. Gena LoPresto Sluga Koeller Nebeker Carlson & Haluck, LLP/Las Vegas Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP/Denver Clerk, United States District Court for the District of Nevada

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) I947A 448949

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

But in the absence of an established set of underlying facts, our answers to the certified questions will largely not be determinative of any part of the federal case and will potentially be of questionable precedential value. As a result, we conclude that our resolution of the certified questions is not appropriate under these circumstances, see Volvo Cars of N. Am., Inc. v. Ricci, 122 Nev. 746, 137 P.3d 1161 (2006), and we therefore decline the certified questions in this case. In so doing, we make no comment on the merits of the certified questions, and our decision to decline these questions shall have no bearing on our decision to accept or decline a subsequent federal court's certification of questions presenting the issues raised here under circumstances more conducive to our consideration of these issues. It is so ORDERED.'

C.J. Gibbons

R rLjcering Hardesty

J. J. Parraguirre

, J. Cherry Saitta

'Having considered appellant's November 25, 2014, motion to set briefing schedule, we deny the motion.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) [947A eon cc: Hon. Gloria M. Navarro, United States District Court of Nevada Kravitz, Schnitzer & Johnson, Chtd. Gena LoPresto Sluga Koeller Nebeker Carlson & Haluck, LLP/Las Vegas Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP/Denver Clerk, United States District Court for the District of Nevada

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) I947A 448949

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scottsdale-ins-co-v-liberty-mutual-ins-co-nev-2014.

Opinion

J. J. Parraguirre

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack