August 26, 2025, Oral Arguments
Sotelo vs. Sotelo (Child Custody)
Las Vegas – 10:00 a.m. – Court of Appeals
Washington vs. Orange Realty Grp., LLC (Civil)
Las Vegas – 11:00 a.m. – Court of Appeals
Dos Santos vs. Dreibelbis (Family)
Las Vegas – 2:00 p.m. – Court of Appeals
Sotelo vs. Sotelo (Child Custody)
Docket No. 88638-COA
Las Vegas – 9:00 a.m. – Court of Appeals
This is the appeal from a decree of divorce and an order granting partial reconsideration. Appellant Paulina Sotelo and respondent Randy Sotelo were involved in a divorce action to resolve the custody of their minor children and the division of their community property. Following a bench trial, the district court characterized the marital residence as community property, and it awarded Paulina periodic alimony for 11 years. The district court entered the order for the decree of divorce, and then later entered an order modifying the decree by extending the alimony award to be permanent alimony but still to be paid periodically. Paulina now appeals from these orders.
Paulina presents the following issues in this appeal: Whether the district court abused its discretion by (1) characterizing the marital residence as community property; (2) by not determining the separate and/or community equity within the property; (3) by not awarding a lump-sum amount of alimony; and (4) by not considering the hardship on Paulina and the minor children in securing alternative housing before ordering the residence to be sold.
Washington vs. Orange Realty Grp., LLC (Civil)
Docket No. 88961-COA
Las Vegas – 11:00 a.m. – Court of Appeals
"This is an appeal from a district court order granting the respondents’ motion to dismiss the appellants’ complaint for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unlawful detainer/wrongful initiation of eviction proceedings. The appellants raise the following issues on appeal: (1) whether the district court erred in dismissing their complaint based on the doctrine of claim preclusion; (2) whether the district court erred in dismissing their complaint based on the doctrine of issue preclusion; (3) whether the district court’s dismissal of their complaint violated their due process rights; and (4) whether the district court erred in failing to apply a public policy based exception to the preclusion doctrines in this case. "
Dos Santos vs. Dreibelbis (Family)
Docket No. 89249-COA
Las Vegas – 2:00 p.m. – Court of Appeals
This is an appeal from a decree of annulment granted under NRS 125.340 for fraud. Appellant argues that the district court applied the incorrect standard of “sufficient proof” instead of the required “clear and convincing evidence” standard when finding fraud. Appellant further contends that the district court’s findings of fraud are unsupported by substantial evidence, as the trial record does not show that appellant made any false representation to respondent or that respondent justifiably relied on such a representation.