Title: Eggleston v. Stuart
Citation: 137 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 51
Docket Number: 
State: Nevada
Issuer: Nevada Supreme Court
Date: September 23, 2021

Eggleston v. Stuart Annotate this Case Justia Opinion Summary The Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the judgment of the district court dismissing Appellant's 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights claims and state law tort claims, holding that the district court erred by requiring Appellant to administratively exhaust all potential remedies. Appellant brought this complaint alleging that Georgina Stuart, who was employed by the Clark County Department of Family Services (DFS), and two police officers forced him to sign a temporary guardianship over his two minor children to the children's maternal aunt. DFS subsequently made a findings of maltreatment against Appellant, which he administratively appealed. The district court dismissed Appellant's request for punitive damages as not available and dismissed Appellant's section 1983 and state law tort claims for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. The Supreme Court reversed in part, holding (1) Appellant was not required to administratively exhaust all potential remedies in his DFS case before bringing his section 1983 and tort claims; and (2) the district court erred by finding that Appellant's section 1983 claim was solely a procedural due process claim subject to the exhaustion doctrine. Read more Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Nevada? Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More › You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Nevada. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here . Opinion Annotation Download PDF Primary Holding The Supreme Court reversed in part the district court's judgment dismissing Appellant's 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights claims and state law tort claims, holding that the court erred by requiring Appellant to administratively exhaust all potential remedies. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship. Eggleston v. Stuart Primary Holding The Supreme Court reversed in part the district court's judgment dismissing Appellant's 42 U.S.C. 19... Read the full annotations for this case. Webinars You Might Like: Please visit individual webinar pages for more information about CLE accreditation.