Vallery v. State
Nevada Supreme Court
118 Nev. 357, 46 P.3d 66 (2002)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
DeLois Vallery (plaintiff) operated two licensed residential care homes: Koenig House and Panther House. Koenig House provided limited supervision, and Panther House provided 24-hour supervision. Howard Thomas resided at Koenig House and suffered from dementia. Thomas developed an infected bedsore, and Vallery failed to obtain timely medical attention to treat Thomas’s sore, which ultimately became severely infected and caused permanent scarring. Daniel Barreto and Duffy Sullivan were residents of Panther House, and both suffered from Alzheimer’s dementia. Although Panther House had a door alarm, as statutorily required, Barreto was able to disable the alarm and escape the house during a snowstorm. Barreto died of hypothermia. Barreto had previously escaped Panther House several times, but Vallery failed to take steps to prevent future escapes. Sullivan suffered severe, fatal burns on the lower half of his body after Vallery left him alone with access to scalding bathwater. The State of Nevada (defendant) charged Vallery with three counts of elder abuse. Because of the timing of events, Vallery was charged under Nevada’s 1993 statute for Thomas and under Nevada’s 1995 statute for Barreto and Sullivan. However, at trial, the jury was only instructed on the 1995 statute, which had a lower threshold for conviction. The jury convicted Vallery on all three counts. Vallery appealed, arguing that the court’s failure to instruct the jury on the 1993 statute for the charge related to Thomas was reversible error.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.