Field Effect Security Inc. v. Eighth Judicial District Court (Anderson)

Summary

The Nevada Supreme Court denied Field Effect Security Inc.'s petition for a writ of mandamus challenging orders denying summary judgment and a motion to strike a jury demand. The court held that NRS 613.010 permits an employee to pursue a civil claim based on a change in place of employment, even without a change in residence, and concluded that the district court did not manifestly abuse its discretion in denying the motion to strike the jury demand.

Holdings

1. NRS 613.010 authorizes a civil cause of action when a worker changes their place of employment in response to an employer's false or deceptive representations concerning the terms and conditions of employment, even if the worker does not physically relocate or change their place of abode, provided the statute's other requirements are satisfied.
2. The district court correctly denied Field Effect's motion for summary judgment, and Field Effect was not entitled to mandamus relief.
3. The district court did not manifestly abuse its discretion by determining that Field Effect waived its challenge to Anderson's jury demand.

Questions Presented

1. Whether NRS 613.010 authorizes a civil cause of action when an employee changes places of employment but does not physically relocate or change residence.
2. Whether the district court manifestly abused its discretion by denying Field Effect's motion for summary judgment.
3. Whether the district court manifestly abused its discretion by denying Field Effect's motion to strike Anderson's jury demand based on a contractual jury-trial waiver.

Disposition

writ_denied