Nevada family-law case summaries

Eric and Vanessa Mesi married in Nevada in 2005 and over the years lived in both Nevada and California. In late 2018 they moved together to Las Vegas, but Vanessa returned to California about a month later. In January 2019, Vanessa filed for divorce in California. Two months later, Eric filed for divorce in Nevada. Each spouse wanted the case decided in their preferred state. Eric asked the California court to dismiss Vanessa's case, arguing that her one month in Nevada interrupted her California residency and meant she did not meet California's six-month residency requirement to file for divorce there. The California court had not ruled on that argument. Meanwhile, Vanessa asked the Nevada court to dismiss Eric's Nevada case under the "first-to-file rule" - a doctrine that says when the same lawsuit is filed in two courts, the second court usually defers to the first. Instead of holding a hearing or ruling based on the written filings, the Nevada judge personally telephoned the California judge. Neither Eric nor Vanessa, nor their lawyers, were on the call. The Nevada judge confirmed through that call that Vanessa had filed first, then immediately dismissed the Nevada case. The Nevada Supreme Court reversed. It held two things. First, the Nevada judge violated Eric's right to due process by gathering information through an ex parte phone call with another judge and basing the decision on that call without giving the parties a chance to respond. Courts are generally not allowed to investigate facts on their own outside the record. The Court noted, however, that this particular due process error was harmless, because the first-to-file rule clearly applied based on the undisputed evidence already in the record. Second, even though the first-to-file rule applied, the Nevada court should not have dismissed the case outright. Because Eric had a pending challenge to California's jurisdiction, the proper course was to stay (pause) the Nevada case rather than dismiss it. That way, if the California court ultimately decides it does not have jurisdiction, the Nevada case can simply be revived without forcing Eric to file again. If California decides it does have jurisdiction, the Nevada case can then be dismissed. The Court therefore sent the case back with instructions to enter a stay. Either party can later ask the Nevada court to lift the stay depending on what the California court decides.