Business Court Pilot

The Commission to Study the Adjudication of Business Law Cases was created through ADKT 0626 under the chairmanship of Chief Justice Douglas Hendon and Justice Lidia Stiglich.  The concept for the Commission stems from the need to create a more effective and efficient business court system where complex business law cases are assigned to departments having dedicated business court caseloads and judges who have been properly vetted before presiding over these cases.

To further the Commission’s work, the Eighth Judicial District Court has initiated a pilot program assigning a dedicated business court caseload to Judge Maria Gall (Department 9) and Judge Joe Hardy (Department 15).  All business court cases filed on or after June 29, 2026, will be randomly assigned to either Judge Gall or Judge Hardy.  Because there exists the right of peremptory challenge in Nevada under SCR 48.1, if a party exercises such right against Judge Gall or Judge Hardy, the case will be reassigned to the other judge.  If both Judge Gall and Judge Hardy are challenged, the case will be reassigned to Judge Mark Denton (Department 13), who will maintain his business court caseload through his retirement at the end of 2026.  If neither Judge Gall, Judge Hardy, nor Judge Denton can preside over a case, Chief Judge Tierra Jones will reassign the case to an alternative judge.

In assembling the pilot, Judges Gall and Hardy have reviewed all business court cases pending as of the program’s start.  Not all cases pending in business court complied with the definition of a business matter set forth under EDCR 1.61.  Regardless, after considering the circumstances and equities, certain of those cases have been accepted into the pilot and reassigned to Judges Gall and Hardy.  The remaining of such cases have been provided a special business designation and will either remain with their current department or be reassigned to another judge who has had a business court docket.

On a going forward basis, Judges Gall and Hardy will review all cases filed in business court, and pursuant to EDCR 1.61(b)(4) will determine whether a case fits the definition of a business matter, is expressly excepted as a business matter, and/or is of a certain case type that the Commission is considering retaining in business court, such as receiverships or cases arising from commercial transactions exceeding $2 million.  If the thrust of the case does not fit within the foregoing and is dedesignated from business court, all business court filing fees will be refunded.  The court encourages the parties to place a specific “jurisdictional” statement on their pleadings explaining why the thrust of the case makes it a matter appropriate for business court.

Certain seemingly “complex” cases that have previously been retained in business court will no longer be accepted, including without limitation those where the thrust of the claims concern products liability, negligent security, personal injury, breach of employment agreements (non-compete and non-solicitation), insurance coverage (even if for commercial policies), false claims act, and consumer protection actions by the attorney general.  The mere need for “enhanced case management” or a mere connection to a commercial transaction or commercial entity is no longer a basis for a case to be retained in business court.

Judge Gall and Judge Hardy will hear cases on their law and motion calendars on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 9:30 AM.  They may schedule certain matters on special setting on other days.  Judge Gall may preside over Judge Hardy’s matters if he is unavailable and vice versa, and they will conduct one another’s settlement conferences.  Working together, Judges Gall and Hardy will collect data on the adjudication of business court cases and implement procedures targeted to ensure more efficient resolution of cases.

Copies of significant business court decisions and orders will be posted here.