Skip to main content
Marshal Shawn Willick

Marshal Willick’s Legal Cases

27 total

  • Landreth v. Malik

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    May 12, 2011
    Outcome:
    The Court accepted the bottom line of Amicus counsel
    Description:
    Essential question was jurisdictional as to the posers of a family court judge, but the subject matter of the dispute was as to property claims between unmarried cohabitants.
  • Seiff v. District Court

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Feb 03, 2011
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal; other side's writ petition dismissed.
    Description:
    Question of application of Argentena lien procedures to already-completed adjudication.
  • Spencer v. Law Group

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Dec 09, 2010
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal -- other side's appeal dismissed.
    Description:
    Challenge to an adjudication of an attorney's lien.
  • Carmona v. Carmona, 603 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 2010)

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    May 04, 2010
    Outcome:
    One stream to one litigant, the other to the other.
    Description:
    Fifteen year slog through the federal courts dealing with survivorship benefits under ERISA-qualified retirement plans.
  • Ogawa v. Ogawa

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Nevada Supreme Court relied on our Amicus Brief in finding no application of the Hague Convention to an international child custody dispute.
  • Hedlund v. Hedlund

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Court relied on our Amicus Brief in finding that reversal was required in case concerning division of Nevada PERS benefits.
  • Rivero v. Rivero

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Court relied on our Amicus Brief in finding that reversal was required and setting up definitions of legal and physical custody, and the impact of timeshare of child support calculations.
  • Cuisenaire v. Mason

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Feb 09, 2006
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the award of prospective child support, and the award of retrospective child support, and remanded for resolution of the survivor's benefits issues, as we requested. Unfortunately, the opposing party died during the pendency of the case, and the Court therefore declined to address the contradiction in Nevada case law regarding partition of omitted military retirement benefits.
  • Miller v. Wilfong

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the award of attorney's fees to counsel for our client, who was represented Pro Bono, finding "the fact that a government institution or a private charity has provided legal assistance should not absolve other responsible parties of their financial obligations." Further, "To impose the burden of the cost of litigation on those who volunteer their services, when the other party has the means to pay attorney fees, would be unjust." An award of fees in a paternity case is permissible under NRS 126.171. In any award of fees in a pro bono case, the award must identify the legal basis for the award, and be supported by affidavits or other evidence that meets the factors set out in prior attorney's fees cases.
  • Olvera v. Olvera

    Practice Area:
    Family
    Date:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Outcome:
    Prevailed on appeal
    Description:
    Obtained reversal of a trial court order. The divorce decree required payments to the former spouse, who received them for many years until the member elected to receive military disability benefits, 25 years post-divorce, eliminating the spousal share. Reversing the district court, the Nevada Supreme Court ordered the member to make up all sums that his election caused to be diverted from the former spouse to him, so that our client was made whole.