The Nevada legislature just passed Shea Backus and Joe Dalia‘s Assembly Joint Resolution 8. I previously covered the constitutional amendment here. This is the first major milestone on the road to an appointed business court for Nevada. I explained the process here:

Amending the Nevada Constitution is no easy feat. For this to succeed, it will need to pass the Legislature twice and then pass a public referendum. Nevada’s Legislature only meets once every two years. If it passes this cycle, it will need to pass again the next cycle (2027) and then pass a referendum. Then the Legislature, once given the constitutional authority to create an appointed court, would need to pass legislation to expend funds and create a business court.

Together with AB239, this has been a busy legislative session for Nevada on the business law front. The broad legislative support signals a focus on keeping Nevada law attractive and promoting swift and consistent adjudication.

How long it takes to have a case heard really matters. Delaware Chief Justice Seitz agrees with me that one of Delaware’s standout strengths is adjudication speed:

Seitz noted the Nevada news in his remarks, but noted that the strength of Delaware’s judiciary and years of accessible case law give it an advantage.

“But putting that to the side, Delaware can also hustle and move on an expedited basis to resolve matters. Without a specialist court with the expertise and bandwidth to move quickly, incorporators may tilt toward Delaware because their courts can resolve huge disputes fairly swiftly,” he said, quoting an analysis by University of Nevada, Las Vegas, law professor Ben Edwards who is advising the Nevada effort.

Passing the amendment this session may have some real effects in the future. Companies considering whether to incorporate in Nevada may be more willing to make the move. If they make the move, they’ll likely be inclined to support the effort to pass it in the next legislative session and, if it passes again, explain why it matters to them for the public referendum phase.

Of course, there are much more local constituencies that will also benefit from a dedicated business court for qualifying matters. This is the jurisdictional scope:

The business court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction to hear disputes involving shareholder rights, mergers and acquisitions, fiduciary duties, receiverships involving business entities and other commercial or contractual disputes between business entities and any other business disputes of a similar nature in which equitable or declaratory relief is sought.

That gives room for the business court to also handle operational matters between businesses, fiduciary matters, receiverships, and other matters with direct local impact.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Benjamin P. Edwards Benjamin P. Edwards

Benjamin Edwards joined the faculty of the William S. Boyd School of Law in 2017. He researches and writes about business and securities law, corporate governance, arbitration, and consumer protection.

Prior to teaching, Professor Edwards practiced as a securities litigator in the New…

Benjamin Edwards joined the faculty of the William S. Boyd School of Law in 2017. He researches and writes about business and securities law, corporate governance, arbitration, and consumer protection.

Prior to teaching, Professor Edwards practiced as a securities litigator in the New York office of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. At Skadden, he represented clients in complex civil litigation, including securities class actions arising out of the Madoff Ponzi scheme and litigation arising out of the 2008 financial crisis. Read More