Opinion ID: 2569241
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Exclusion of English Translations of Four Arabic Letters

Text: During the proceedings, Talia and Sam attempted to admit four Arabic letters written by Hikmet to Talia and Sam. Talia and Sam had the letters translated by a translator certified by the Eighth Judicial District Court. The translations were accompanied by a sworn affidavit of the translator. The significance of the letters, according to Talia and Sam, is that they rebut Raja and Hikmet's assertions that they never intended the child to remain with Talia and Sam. Talia and Sam contend that this excluded evidence is manifestly important to their case and that the district court erred in excluding the letters. The district court has considerable discretion in determining the admissibility of evidence and this court will not disturb a district court's ruling absent an abuse of that discretion. See K-Mart Corporation v. Washington, 109 Nev. 1180, 866 P.2d 274 (1993). NRS 51.075 provides in relevant part that [a] statement is not excluded by the hearsay rule if its nature and the special circumstances under which it was made offer assurances of accuracy not likely to be enhanced by calling the declarant as a witness. We conclude that the district court abused its discretion in excluding the certified translations of the four Arabic letters written by Hikmet to Talia and Sam.