IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

GARY R. SCHMIDT, No. 75815

Appellant,
vs.
THE STATE OF NEVADA; AND ADAM
P. LAXALT, ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondents.

ORDER DIRECTING ORAL ARGUMENT AND IMPOSING STAY

This is an appeal from a district court order deciding a

challenge to appellant's residency qualification for the office of Nevada
State Senate District 16 and ordering appellant's name removed from the
ballot, if possible, and signs posted at pertinent polling locations informing
voters of his disqualification. In light of the primary election scheduled for
June 12, 2018, appellant moved for an expedited briefing schedule, which
motion we granted. Having now preliminarily reviewed the parties' briefs
and supporting documentation, we determine that this appeal raises
significant legal questions with statewide implications, and that oral
argument would be of assistance in resolving this matter. Accordingly, the
clerk shall schedule this matter for oral argument before the en banc court
on July 9, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. in Carson City. The argument shall be limited
to 30 minutes.
Given the significant issues in this case and the necessity for
oral argument, we determine that insufficient time exists for us to
adequately analyze the parties' arguments and law involved and render a
final decision before the periods for absentee and early voting expire and
the primary election takes place on June 12. Further, we recognize that
[alny doubt as to the qualifications of a candidate should be resolved in
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA

(0) I947A
favor of permitting the candidate to run for public office." Russell v.
Goldsby, 780 So. 2d 1048, 1051 (La. 2000); see also McKinney v. Kaminsky,
340 F. Supp. 289, 294 (M.D. Ala. 1972) ("Any questions or doubts of
eligibility of a candidate to seek political office should be resolved in favor
of the candidate." (citing cases)); Heleringer v. Brown, 104 S.W.3d 397, 404
(Ky. 2003) (same). Under the 2017 amendments to NRS Chapter 293, the
Legislature has recognized the possibility of remedies other than those
ordered by the district court in the event a person is determined disqualified
from candidacy after the ballots have been printed and the primary election
conducted. 2017 Nev. Stat., ch. 502, at § 1.3, at 3295; see NRS 293.182(5)
(2017). Thus, in light of the unsettled issues on appeal and the policy
favoring candidates' right to run for office, we believe that appellant should
be allowed to run for election pending our resolution of this appeal, and
therefore, we stay the district court's order until further order of this court.
It is so ORDERED.

eli

Pleke4
Pickering

Stiglich
cc: Hon. James E. Wilson, District Judge
O'Mara Law Firm, P.C.
Attorney General/Carson City
Attorney General/Las Vegas
Carson City Clerk