search3
Tools to fight online harassment

Nevada: Family Law

Contents

  1. Child Custody
  2. Divorce

  1. Child Custody

    1. Introduction

      If the victim of the nonconsensual online publication of intimate photos is involved in a child custody dispute, s/he may use evidence of this type of misconduct to establish abuse or harassment by his/her former spouse or lover. When determining child custody, the court’s primary consideration is to decide what is in the best interests of the child.

    2. Text of the Statute

      Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125.480

      “4. In determining the best interest of the child, the court shall consider and set forth its specific findings concerning, among other things:

      […]

      (d) The level of conflict between the parents.

      (e) The ability of the parents to cooperate to meet the needs of the child.

      (f) The mental and physical health of the parents.

      […]

      (k) Whether either parent or any other person seeking custody has engaged in an act of domestic violence against the child, a parent of the child or any other person residing with the child.

      […]

      5. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 6 or NRS 125C.210, a determination by the court after an evidentiary hearing and finding by clear and convincing evidence that either parent or any other person seeking custody has engaged in one or more acts of domestic violence against the child, a parent of the child or any other person residing with the child creates a rebuttable presumption that sole or joint custody of the child by the perpetrator of the domestic violence is not in the best interest of the child. Upon making such a determination, the court shall set forth:

      (a) Findings of fact that support the determination that one or more acts of domestic violence occurred; and

      (b) Findings that the custody or visitation arrangement ordered by the court adequately protects the child and the parent or other victim of domestic violence who resided with the child.

      6. If after an evidentiary hearing held pursuant to subsection 5 the court determines that each party has engaged in acts of domestic violence, it shall, if possible, then determine which person was the primary physical aggressor. In determining which party was the primary physical aggressor for the purposes of this section, the court shall consider:

      (a) All prior acts of domestic violence involving either party;

      (b) The relative severity of the injuries, if any, inflicted upon the persons involved in those prior acts of domestic violence;

      (c) The likelihood of future injury;

      (d) Whether, during the prior acts, one of the parties acted in self-defense; and

      (e) Any other factors which the court deems relevant to the determination.

      In such a case, if it is not possible for the court to determine which party is the primary physical aggressor, the presumption created pursuant to subsection 5 applies to both parties. If it is possible for the court to determine which party is the primary physical aggressor, the presumption created pursuant to subsection 5 applies only to the party determined by the court to be the primary physical aggressor.”1

      Nev. Rev. Stat. § 33.018

      “1. Domestic violence occurs when a person commits one of the following acts against or upon the person’s spouse or former spouse, any other person to whom the person is related by blood or marriage, any other person with whom the person is or was actually residing, any other person with whom the person has had or is having a dating relationship, any other person with whom the person has a child in common, the minor child of any of those persons, the person’s minor child or any other person who has been appointed the custodian or legal guardian for the person’s minor child:

      […]

      (e) A knowing, purposeful or reckless course of conduct intended to harass the other person. Such conduct may include, but is not limited to:

      (1) Stalking.

      […]

      (3) Trespassing.

      […]

      (5) Destruction of private property.

      […].”2

    3. Cases

      Research is ongoing.

    1. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 125.480 (LexisNexis 2011). ↩
    2. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 33.018 (LexisNexis 2011). ↩
    ↑ Back to top

  2. Divorce

    1. Introduction

      Due to Nevada’s ‘no-fault’ divorce policy,1 evidence of spousal misconduct such as the nonconsensual publication of intimate photos taken during the marriage will not be taken into consideration during divorce proceedings. In Nevada, divorce can be granted because of “incompatibility,” “[i]nsanity existing for two years prior to the commencement of the action,” and if the “husband and wife have lived separate and apart for one year without cohabitation.”2

    2. Text of the Statute

      Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125.010

      “Divorce from the bonds of matrimony may be obtained for any of the following causes:

      1. Insanity existing for 2 years prior to the commencement of the action. Upon this cause of action the court, before granting a divorce, shall require corroborative evidence of the insanity of the defendant at that time, and a decree granted on this ground shall not relieve the successful party from contributing to the support and maintenance of the defendant, and the court may require the plaintiff in such action to give bond therefor in an amount to be fixed by the court.

      2. When the husband and wife have lived separate and apart for 1 year without cohabitation the court may, in its discretion, grant an absolute decree of divorce at the suit of either party.

      3. Incompatibility.”3

    3. Cases

      Research is ongoing.

    1. Note, however, that Nevada does grant divorce for insanity, in which case, the insane spouse would technically be at-fault for the divorce. ↩
    2. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 125.010 (LexisNexis 2011). ↩
    3. Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 125.010 (LexisNexis 2011). ↩
    ↑ Back to top