[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6564752,"mediaKeyId","3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26","parentId",3273220,"title","Assembly Judiciary Committee amends and forwards two Senate bills (SB20, SB347) in work session","audioSeconds",94,"startMs",1387000,"endMs",1481000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26&start=1387&end=1481","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26/thumbnail_1387000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6564752/Nevada/Assembly-Judiciary-Committee-amends-and-forwards-two-Senate-bills-SB20-SB347-in-work-session","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6564752-50486c9e740b77185c8e6b26d0a461a5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430954&Signature=CfA05uMWcupb05eREVjs3L~hnAKJU-cgxzd~u~vj2XNdpgywe1lZq0YXSWCsamfmO6nP0c6Zs4mhu9r0dhz~vdgVAZ2MxwDh-Nd441od6DVYG-S7zyC9CcxI3NlJygpf27cUIFCO3ZQ84L4FyXiMb3V2uKikVCyse5V8YwLIJQvVUSUVasEzpk2lHHQOh4GWPCcOJJ4BXImdXRM6J12CZrqloL6aChq-Q2B3TUwZnn3vymyrCLD~w6nk1p-VUSRCv~ZRIQgNo-NRliXBQTpDw9I~oACAn897se-7sYdpe~42fSxTZDFSLw4BPZgb237oecMsOmP58oev8UvOizJD7Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Nevada Legislature","date","2025-05-10T23:05:53Z","article","CARSON CITY — During the Assembly Judiciary Committee’s work session the panel considered amendments and recommended do‑pass actions on two Senate measures.

Senate Bill 20: The committee considered an amendment, submitted by Jason Frierson on behalf of the Eighth Judicial District Court, to require jury commissioners to use Department of Health and Human Services information when compiling jury selection lists unless federal law prohibits doing so, and to authorize DHHS to provide a list of public assistance recipients for jury selection only when not barred by federal law or regulation. Vice Chair Marzola moved to amend and recommend do‑pass; Assembly Member Gonzales seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Chair Miller assigned the floor statement to Assembly Member Yurek.

Senate Bill 347: The committee considered an amendment (submitted by Paloma Guerrero) to clarify that an officer may confiscate a firearm during a mental‑health crisis hold only if the firearm is found on the person or in their immediate vicinity, rather than any firearms merely under the person’s custody or control. Vice Chair Marzola moved to amend and recommend do‑pass; Assembly Member Moore seconded the motion. During discussion Assembly Member Hanson voiced remaining concerns and stated she would vote no on final floor action unless clarifying language addressed returning process questions on the floor. The committee nonetheless moved the amendment and recommended do‑pass; Chair Miller noted members with opposing hands and assigned the floor statement to Assembly Member Moore.

Both measures were advanced with committee floor assignments; the committee did not take recorded roll‑call tallies of individual members’ votes on the floor assignments during the work session beyond the committee’s voice votes and chair announcements.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5/12/2025 - Assembly Committee on Judiciary","oneSentenceSummary","In the committee work session the panel moved amendments and recommended do‑pass actions for SB20 (jury selection lists) and SB347 (mental health crisis holds); both measures were assigned floor statements.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature NV, Nevada","taxId",78440,"location","Nevada","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6564754,"Bill would limit length of cannabis administrative holds, require more notice and board review",2328,3366000,5694000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26&start=3366&end=5694","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26/thumbnail_3366000.jpg","/articles/6564754/Nevada/Bill-would-limit-length-of-cannabis-administrative-holds-require-more-notice-and-board-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6564754-b0a688973fb4b0a2f50905101d7f98a8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430954&Signature=Wh47H6GA-BIVWwKHlWMC4tCqbQuGOZERqFp9yXMKdwVEWY28F43XCKtqBFlR8tC4wn7kyVRAIwPzEyj0irfaiKFwIIwB0zte6eDhtBZBNIIAfORRM4LqS17TS2HUzes1wQ02S36l-hb8USKk7Z7xyco-fwVA00Ua3VKpkEEwdsROH9UdYj0cTG~kefbfII9VSORyDTz6B3tFk4cvsGbk7-HXaq3Fy5XBXsJDpFki~JNJsNldfLbKLs1rEF3J4rqtHxoT27v0afuxMJTPDAauEaiLxRlMhKy9YNj1qrLAF3ph14nB7d5JDlfuGvmL0oZ4Hnp-X-JCv1MSZi-gVEd6Qg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CARSON CITY — Sen. Rochelle Wynne, R‑Senate District 3, presented Senate Bill 168 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee, saying the measure aims to modernize parts of Nevada’s young cannabis regulatory framework and add due‑process guardrails to the cannabis compliance board’s administrative‑hold procedures.

“Administrative holds are not recalls,” Wynne told the committee, describing holds as a pause in the seed‑to‑sale system while the board investigates whether a product poses a risk. She said holds can tie up tens of thousands to millions of dollars of product and sometimes last months, causing product to expire before any formal determination is reached.

The bill would require the Cannabis Compliance Board (CCB) to provide more information about the reason for a hold, set a timeline for board consideration of holds (with an initial timeline and a mechanism to extend), and create clearer steps licensees may use to seek release of held product. SB168 also contains updates to packaging and labeling and increases packaging sizes to align with prior legislative changes.

Industry witnesses and trade groups supported the bill. Lake Martin of the Nevada Cannabis Association said administrative holds are placed through the state's Metrc tracking software and freeze affected products across the distribution network; operators then must remove products from the shelf, customer baskets and pickups. Martin said holds can remain in place for many months and that licensees have reported losses “that extend for many months” and, in extreme cases, licensees “have lost $100,000” or more. A representative for Green Thumb Industries said the company had a hold in which more than $200,000 of product was frozen for roughly nine months and that the operator ultimately chose to destroy product to free shelf space.

CCB Executive Director James Humm and chief of health and safety Cara Cronkite testified in neutral. Cronkite said the agency places holds only where there is a potential risk to public health or safety and noted the agency’s inability to test for every inert pesticide ingredient; she recommended the committee use the phrase “potential risk to public health” rather than the draft bill’s language that had included “substantial hazard to public health.” Director Goicoechea of the Nevada Department of Agriculture joined in neutral testimony, explaining that pesticide inert ingredients present testing challenges because many are trade‑secret formulations and that federal regulation does not cover cannabis.

Sen. Wynne said part of SB168’s purpose is to bring more predictability to businesses while retaining the CCB’s investigatory authority. The bill would require the CCB to bring the hold to the board within an initial timeline (the sponsor discussed a 30‑day period in committee testimony) and allow the board to extend if necessary. The bill text also includes labeling and packaging clarifications in sections cited by sponsors and industry representatives as intended to avoid duplicative requirements.

Committee members asked about the standard that triggers a hold — for example, whether the standard should be “substantial hazard” or a lower threshold such as “potential risk to public health” or “significant.” Director Goicoechea and Cronkite recommended language used in other public health contexts (e.g., “potential risk to public health”) and cautioned about the Department of Agriculture’s limits in pesticide testing for cannabis. Several members and witnesses said the CCB had issued holds without immediate board review, and supporters said SB168 creates clearer timelines and a board‑level backstop for licensees.

Public testimony included multiple industry groups in support, the CCB leadership in neutral, and the Department of Agriculture in neutral. No opposition testimony was recorded at the hearing. The committee closed the SB168 hearing after iterative Q&A and neutral testimony.

If enacted, supporters say the bill would reduce indefinite holds that cause product loss while preserving the board’s authority to act on public‑health concerns.","Sen. Rochelle Wynne’s SB168 would add timing and procedural guards to cannabis compliance board administrative holds, require clearer reasons for holds, and update packaging/labeling rules; industry and board testified about costly prolonged holds.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":46,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6564759,"Senator Scheibel presents SB404 to revise Nevada probate and trust statutes",1895,3376000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26&start=1481&end=3376","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3273220-8f24beb66e24b7a2db8b75a953725a26/thumbnail_1481000.jpg","/articles/6564759/Nevada/Senator-Scheibel-presents-SB404-to-revise-Nevada-probate-and-trust-statutes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6564759-ee934bb6961a6f76d8fc1711a7b9a6cf/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430954&Signature=KhNI518ggsnDEp1Wl0iQK4ILuJ0pNH6sOWCDH0-uZu3s5EIBiFnPH01l42abZ~oFB2TjvXbvezaAhyRHpwimKoaJ2CnQFT1DvniiQuwzKsbBiaijeSYY0rsJBMVhbooHmQwz0PfX~P-zCY~iOxm8eHVYo9ey3qSs3eQ-rABxeGdFO0ouKyrQ-qeyNrpsBxcBXHKYTMJe4qPwlybQEI~eqt7IaaUex-Px7Kz4y5XUVff8Fe8PD3a98VKjIIjSNRXBmbTA~lzHejNl-7QvrIpMpifadxi17eMdYaxlXh3xu88UDZaknaewrMvgo8vMDBnpdAAULZ1S7-xmCdOgxBmSeg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CARSON CITY — State Sen. Melanie Scheibel, D‑Las Vegas, opened a hearing before the Assembly Judiciary Committee on Senate Bill 404, telling the panel she brought the measure “to ensure fairness for Nevadans and to prevent bad actors from utilizing loopholes within the probate statute.”

The measure, sponsored in the Senate on behalf of the Nevada Supreme Court, would revise numerous provisions in Nevada’s probate and trust law, including changes to the Independent Administration Act, increases to threshold amounts for summary and small‑estate procedures, and the addition of an explicit statute of limitations for certain fiduciary‑duty claims.

SB404’s supporters told the committee the bill is primarily cleanup and modernization of the Nevada Revised Statutes in the probate and trust sections and contains targeted substantive changes administrators and probate attorneys say respond to recurring problems in practice. Michelle Rafferty, co‑chair of the Legislative Committee for the Probate and Trust Section of the Nevada State Bar, said the bill “walks through” many technical sections and that several subsections proposed for removal would be pulled back for additional vetting.

The bill would revise procedures for independent administration — a streamlined probate path intended for uncontested estates — to curb misuse by parties who might exploit the simplified process to sell estate property below fair market value. Attorney Kenny Lee explained independent administration’s purpose and limits, saying it allows heirs who agree to avoid a court confirmation sale and related expense but is not intended for contested matters or estates with unknown heirs.

SB404 would also raise threshold amounts: the bill increases the summary administration threshold to $500,000 (previously $300,000) and raises the small‑estate affidavit limit from $100,000 to $150,000. Rafferty described those changes as intended to reduce expense and delay for lower‑value estates.

One substantive addition would put a statute of limitations into Nevada law for claims of breach of fiduciary duty at the negligence standard; Rafferty said this does not affect existing limits for fraud or willful misconduct. Other provisions clarify notice requirements to interested persons, define when Nevada is the proper jurisdiction to administer a trust, update accounting deadlines for trustees, and modernize rules about when distributions to a trust are treated as vested so unnecessary interim trusts need not be created.

Committee members asked about the order of priority for appointment of an administrator, the meaning of the term “other issue” in the bill’s parentage language, and whether minors could serve as administrators. Carly O’Krent, legal counsel, explained “other issue” is intended to mean lineal descendants beyond children and grandchildren (for example, great‑grandchildren). Rafferty and Senator Scheibel told the committee that the statutory appointment priority primarily guides a judge when no family consensus exists and does not prevent families from agreeing to a different appointee.

Rafferty and others indicated sections 13 and 14 (and related sections 15 and 16) would be removed from the bill for further work and that the Legislative Counsel Bureau may make clerical adjustments, such as fixing subsection references. No formal vote on SB404 occurred at the hearing; the sponsor closed the hearing after no public testimony was offered in Carson City or on the call.

The bill drew sustained technical presentation from counsel and probate practitioners and elicited multiple member questions on administration priority, minors, and notice procedures. The committee record closed after the presentations and committee Q&A; senators and witnesses indicated readiness to continue technical refinement outside the hearing.

Looking ahead, supporters said the intent is to reduce administrative costs and time for modest estates while adding guardrails to prevent predatory uses of simplified probate procedures.","Sen. Melanie Scheibel and probate attorneys outlined changes in SB404 to tighten independent administration, raise small-estate thresholds and add a statute of limitations for fiduciary‑duty claims; committee held a hearing and closed the record.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Assembly Judiciary Committee amends and forwards two Senate bills (SB20, SB347) in work session

Bill would limit length of cannabis administrative holds, require more notice and board review

Senator Scheibel presents SB404 to revise Nevada probate and trust statutes