The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContact
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >Eicon v. Broddie
Nevada Supreme Court

Eicon v. Broddie

569210 citations

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • that the time limitation set forth in NRS 616C.390(5) acts as a jurisdictiona...

Table of Contents

  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • that the time limitation set forth in NRS 616C.390(5) acts as a jurisdictiona...

No summary available for this case.

Opinions

that the time limitation set forth in NRS 616C.390(5) acts as a jurisdictional bar to the reopening of claims that fall within the statute and does not constitute an affirmative defense that can be waived by a party's failure to raise that defense. Moreover, this court has held that questions of subject matter jurisdiction, such as the one presented here, may be raised by the parties at any time or by a reviewing court sua sponte. See Landreth v. Malik, 127 Nev. „ 251 P.3d 163, 166 (2011). Accordingly, the fact that EICON raises this jurisdictional argument for the first time on appeal does not bar its consideration by this court. Turning to the situation presented by this case, NRS 616C.390(5) establishes a one-year time limit on the reopening of a workers' compensation claim if the claimant was not off work as a result of her industrial injury and did not receive a permanent partial disability award. The appeals officer, however, did not determine whether Broddie was off work as a result of her industrial injury or whether she received a permanent partial disability award so as to preclude the application of NRS 616C.390(5). Because, in the context of a workers' compensation matter, this court will not make such factual determinations in the first instance, see Roberts v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 114 Nev. 364, 367, 956 P.2d 790, 791-92 (1998) (stating that this court reviews an appeals officer's determinations on issues of law de novo, but gives deference to the appeals officer's factual findings when supported by substantial evidence), we reverse the district court's order denying judicial review and direct the district court to remand the matter to the appeals officer to determine whether Broddie's claim reopening fell within the parameters of NRS

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A

ENIEelinaRliNEMNOVIENn 616C.390(5) so as to be jurisdictionally barred by her failure to seek reopening within one year of her claim's closure. It is so ORDERED.

Douglas

J. Saitta

cc: Hon. Jessie Elizabeth Walsh, District Judge William C. Turner, Settlement Judge Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas Nevada Attorney for Injured Workers/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

LC NEMENIEEZENZEZIEEMBILLS

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

info@thelawlion.com
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap