Motion to Intervene in Nevada

Background

“NRS 12.130 provides that ‘[b]efore the trial, any person may intervene in an action or proceeding, who has an interest in the matter in litigation, in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both.’” (Nalder v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2020) 462 P.3d 677, 682.)

General Information for Complaints and Motions

“NRS 12.130(2) further provides that an intervenor may join the plaintiff ‘in claiming what is sought,’ or may join the defendant ‘in resisting the claims of the plaintiff.’” (Lopez v. Merit Ins. Co. (1993) 109 Nev. 553, 555-56.)

“The plain language of NRS 12.130 clearly indicates that intervention is appropriate only during ongoing litigation, where the intervenor has an opportunity to protect or pursue an interest which will otherwise be infringed. The plain language of NRS 12.130 does not permit intervention subsequent to the entry of a final judgment.” (Id.)

Standard of Review and Burdens of Proof

“Generally, orders granting intervention and orders granting consolidation can be challenged on appeal.” (Nalder v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2020) 462 P.3d 677, 681-82 citing generally, e.g., Lopez v. Merit Ins. Co. (1993) 109 Nev. 553, 853 P.2d 1266 [challenging intervention on appeal from final judgment]; Zupancic v. Sierra Vista Recreation, Inc. (1981) 97 Nev. 187, 625 P.2d 1177 [challenging consolidation on appeal from permanent injunction].)

“Nonetheless, [a reviewing] court may still exercise its discretion to provide writ relief ‘under circumstances of urgency or strong necessity, or when an important issue of law needs clarification and sound judicial economy and administration favor the granting of the petition.’” (Nalder v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2020) 462 P.3d 677, 681-82 quoting Cote H. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2008) 124 Nev. 36, 39, 175 P.3d 906, 908.)

The Court’s Decision

“Determinations on intervention lie within the district court's discretion.” (Nalder v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (2020) 462 P.3d 677, 682 citing Lawler v. Ginochio (1978) 94 Nev. 623, 626.) “While [a reviewing court will] ordinarily defer to the district court's exercise of its discretion, ‘deference is not owed to legal error.’” (Nalder, id., citing AA Primo Builders, LLC v. Washington (2010) 126 Nev. 578, 589.)

“In Moore v. District Court, 77 Nev. 357, 364 P.2d 1073 (1961), [the Nevada Supreme] court clearly held that a proposed intervenor does not become a party to a lawsuit unless and until the district court grants a motion to intervene.” (Aetna Life Casualty v. Rowan (1991) 107 Nev. 362, 363 citing id., [concluding that “an appeal cannot lie from an order of a district court that denies a motion to intervene. Review of such orders may be had in this court only by a petition for extraordinary relief.”])