LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT AND CCMSI v. SONIA WATTERSON (2026)

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REHEARING, WITHDRAWING ORDER, AND SUBSTITUTING ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

On November 12, 2025, we issued an order reversing the district court's grant of a petition for judicial review in a workers’ compensation case, wherein an appeals officer denied correctional officer Sonia Watterson's claim for occupational lung disease. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't v. Watterson, No. 89692-COA, 2025 WL 3170864 (Nev. Ct. App. Nov. 12, 2025) (Order of Reversal). We concluded that although Watterson was eligible for NRS 617.455(5)’s conclusive presumption that her lung disease arose out of and in the course of her employment based on her years of full-time and continuous service, she did not show that her lung disease was caused by exposure to heat, smoke, fumes, tear gas, or other noxious gases, as required by the plain language of NRS 617.455(1). Id. at *4. Watterson then petitioned for rehearing under NRAP 40(a) after the legislature passed Senate Bill 7 (S.B. 7), which amended the at-issue provisions of NRS 617.455. S.B. 7 was signed by the governor and became effective on November 29, 2025. 2025 Nev. Stat., ch. 13, § 1 (36th Spec. Sess. 2025); S.B. 7, 36th Leg. Spec. Sess. (Nev. 2025).

The amended NRS 617.455(5) provides that “a disease of the lungs is not required to be caused by exposure to heat, smoke, fumes, tear gas, or any other noxious gases and is conclusively presumed to have arisen out of and in the course of the employment” of a person who meets the full-time and continuous service requirements. 2025 Nev. Stat., ch. 13, § 1 (36th Spec. Sess. 2025) (emphasis added). Further, the amended NRS 617.455(1) explicitly exempts from its exposure requirement individuals who satisfy subsection 5's conclusive presumption. 2025 Nev. Stat., ch. 13, § 1 (36th Spec. Sess. 2025). Section 2 of S.B. 7 provides that “[t]he amendatory provisions of section 1 of this act apply retroactively to claims filed on or before the effective date of this act.” 2025 Nev. Stat., ch. 13, § 2 (36th Spec. Sess. 2025). Therefore, the amended version of NRS 617.455 applies to Watterson's claim. Pub. Emps.’ Benefits Program v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't, 124 Nev. 138, 155, 179 P.3d 542, 553 (2008) (“[W]hen the Legislature intends retroactive application, it is capable of stating so clearly.”); see also Holguin v. City of Henderson, No. 89345, 2026 WL 491678 (Nev. Feb. 20, 2026) (Order Granting Petition for Rehearing, Withdrawing Opinion, and Substituting Order of Reversal and Remand).

Because amended NRS 617.455 is “a new rule of law, directly controlling on the disposition of the issues in the case,” we grant the petition for rehearing. NRAP 40(a)(3). NRS 617.455’s new language removes the basis for our previous interpretation of the statute, which supported reversing the district court's grant of judicial review following the appeals officer's denial of Watterson's claim. Under the amended statute, Watterson's entitlement to NRS 617.455(5)’s conclusive presumption plainly exempts her from subsection 1's exposure requirement. She has thus established a compensable occupational lung disease claim under the amended statute, warranting reversal of the appeals officer's determination. Accordingly, we direct the clerk of this court to withdraw our November 12, 2025, order in this matter. In substitution, we hereby affirm the district court order granting Watterson's petition for judicial review and remand for proceedings consistent with this order.

It is so ORDERED.

Bulla, C.J.

Gibbons, J.

Westbrook, J.