Nevada
Subgrades  
Covered Speech: A+
Anti-SLAPP Procedures: A
Subscores  
Covered Speech: 100 out of 100 points
Anti-SLAPP Procedures: 95 out of 100 points
Detailed Scoring on Anti-SLAPP Procedures  
Suspension of Court Proceedings Upon an Anti-SLAPP Motion: 18 of 20 points
Burden of Proof on Plaintiff to Defeat an Anti-SLAPP Motion: 12 of 12 points
Right to an Immediate Appeal: 25 of 25 points
Award of Costs and Attorney Fees: 40 of 40 points
Expansive Statutory Interpretation Instruction to Courts: 0 of 3 points

State Anti-SLAPP Statute

Nevada’s anti-SLAPP statute[1] protects any statement that is truthful or that is made without knowledge of its falsehood that is “(1) Communication that is aimed at procuring any governmental or electoral action, result or outcome; (2) Communication of information or a complaint to a Legislator, officer or employee of the Federal Government, [Nevada] or a political subdivision of [Nevada], regarding a matter reasonably of concern to the respective governmental entity; (3) Written or oral statement made in direct connection with an issue under consideration by a legislative, executive or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law; or (4) Communication made in direct connection with an issue of public interest in a place open to the public or in a public forum.” Although discovery is stayed once an anti-SLAPP motion is filed, a court may nonetheless order limited discovery to be conducted upon a showing that information relevant to issues raised by the motion is in the possession of another party or a third party and is not reasonably available without discovery. To prevail on an anti-SLAPP motion after the movant has established that the communication at issue is covered by the anti-SLAPP statute, the respondent must demonstrate with prima facie evidence a probability of prevailing on the claim. The statute provides for interlocutory appeal of an order denying an anti-SLAPP motion. The court must award costs and attorney fees related to the action to the prevailing movant on an anti-SLAPP motion. Conversely, if the court finds the motion to be frivolous or vexatious, then it must award costs and attorney fees related to the motion to the prevailing respondent.

[1] Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.635 through 41.670.

Dan Greenberg & David Keating

https://www.ifs.org/author/dgreenburg/

Copy link
Powered by Social Snap