Family Law

Appointed to the Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Division, Department N in March 2023 by Governor Joe Lombardo.

Family Law, Domestic Law, Personal Injury, Juvenile Law, Criminal Law

Attorney/Owner, Paul M. Gaudet Law Practice (1992-2023)

• Focused on family law, including divorce, child custody, and other domestic matters, alongside personal injury, juvenile, and criminal law.

1. 1. Bush v. State (1996):
      • Summary:  Represented Mr and Ms. Bush, both mentally handicapped, in a termination of parental rights case. The case involved the State's efforts to terminate the couple’s parental rights, which was appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
      • Significance: This case inspired Gaudet to take on over 100 similar cases, often at discounted rates, advocating for parents facing the termination of their parental rights.
   2. Cannon v. Zakouto (2020):
      • Summary: Gaudet represented Ms.Cannon in a case involving protective orders, domestic violence, and contempt of court. Mr. Zakouto violated the protective order, was held in contempt and sentenced to jail. Tragically, after his early release, Mr. Zakouto murdered Ms.Cannon.
      • Significance: Professionally, these cases caused Gaudet to take careful notice of signs of domestic violence, from both victim and perpetrator perspectives, and certainly modified the way he consoled clients on domestic violence issues.
   3. State v. Whitaker (1994):

• • • Summary: Co-counsel in the defense of Mr. Whitaker, a young father accused of murdering his infant child. The State sought the death penalty, but the case was resolved by plea, resulting in a life sentence. 
    • Significance: This case, occurring before Gaudet became a father, gave him a heightened appreciation for the time spent with his own children. Professionally, it solidified his concern for the welfare of children in any family or juvenile case.

1. 1. Carly v. Carly (1993):
      • Summary: He represented Ms. Carly in a divorce case, securing primary physical custody of the children, as well as support and property division, after taking over the case on short notice.
      • Significance: This was Gaudet's first trial after being sworn in as an attorney and confirmed his desire to focus his career on family law, a passion he had held since law school.

• • Time in Court: 100% of his practice has involved litigation, primarily in trial courts.
  • Total Trials: 
    • Jury: 3
    • Bench: 20
  • Estimate percentage of time spent:
    • Domestic/family: 70%
    • Juvenile matters: 5%
    • Trial court civil: 20% 
    • Appellate civil: 5%
    • Trial court criminal: 5%

 

Licensed since 1992; over 30 years

• Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada
  • A Foundational member of the Minor Guardianship Advocacy Program, established in early 2020 to address the legal needs of vulnerable children in guardianship cases. Maxey played a pivotal role in shaping the program’s direction, including developing attorney duties and standards of practice. 
  • Scheduled to teach a Continuing Education Class on the differences between NRS 159A guardianship and NRS 432B guardianship.
  • Maxey participates in a committee proposing legislative reforms to NRS 159A to better reflect the realities of minor guardianship.
• Clark County Public Defender’s Office
  • Represented minors aged 8-21 charged with a wide range of offenses, including serious felonies and cases involving transfer proceedings from juvenile court to the adult criminal system.

• Continued to represent clients through the completion of their cases in the adult criminal system.
• Has taught Continuing Education Classes on Juvenile Sex Offenders and the process of transferring minors from the delinquency system to the criminal system. 
• Supervised student attorneys from the Boyd School of Law, training them in juvenile defense.

Civil/Criminal Split

1. 1. In the Matter of Guardianship: A.C.L. (2020):
      • Summary: This case involved a five-year-old girl, A.C.L., who was placed under guardianship following the death of her mother due to a drug overdose. The situation was complicated by severe dental neglect—when her father picked her up, A.C.L.'s teeth were rotting, broken off at the gum line, and oozing pus. The dentist, shocked by her condition, offered to testify for free. Meanwhile, the child’s maternal grandmother, unhappy with the custody arrangement, filed for guardianship despite having a troubling (CPS) history, including failing to protect her own daughters from sexual abuse by her husband, who was later imprisoned. Maxey’s investigation revealed these details, which were crucial in the custody battle.
      • Significance: This case was Maxey’s first guardianship non-jury trial, which later evolved into a custody trial due to procedural issues. It was a significant learning experience for her, demonstrating the importance of perseverance and thorough representation. Despite the dismissal of the guardianship case on a technicality, Maxey continued to represent A.C.L. in the custody proceedings, where she successfully argued that placing the child with her grandmother would not be in her best interest.
   2. In the Matter of A.C., a Subject Minor (2020):
      • Summary: A.C., a five-year-old girl removed from her mother’s care due to a history of drug addiction, domestic violence, and severe disciplinary abuse by the mother’s boyfriend. A.C. was initially placed with her maternal grandparents, who were advised by CPS to file for guardianship under NRS 159A. When Maxey visited A.C., she observed troubling behaviors—pacing, squeaky noises, and a lack of eye contact, which indicated significant trauma. Through play, Maxey was able to build trust with A.C., who reacted strongly when asked about her mother, confirming the depth of her emotional distress.
      • Significance: By explaining the differences between guardianship through a guardianship court and a dependency court to the grandparents, Maxey helped them understand the importance of CPS oversight. Her efforts led to the withdrawal of the guardianship petition, ensuring that A.C.’s case remained under the more suitable jurisdiction.
   3. In the Matter of Guardianship: E.C., Proposed Protected Minor (2022):
      • Summary: E.C., a ten-year-old boy diagnosed with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and acute anemia, required a life-saving blood transfusion. However, his devout Jehovah’s Witness parents refused the procedure due to their religious beliefs. An employee of Summerlin Hospital filed for guardianship to authorize the transfusion against E.C.’s wishes. E.C., fully aware of the consequences, objected to the transfusion, preferring to adhere to his faith even if it meant facing death.
      • Significance: This was the first time she represented a client whose wishes were not in their best medical interest. She upheld E.C.’s strong religious convictions, prioritizing his autonomy and beliefs over medical advice. The petition was ultimately withdrawn, but the case reinforced Maxey’s commitment to truly client-directed representation, even in life-and-death situations.

1. 2. State of Nevada vs. Darrnell Townsel, 2017:

• • • Summary: In 2012, Darrnell, Darnell, diagnosed with Mild Mental Retardation (MMR) and an IQ of 59, was found competent to stand trial despite his impairments. The State of Nevada moved his case to adult criminal court, a decision Maxey appealed, arguing it violated his due process rights and was cruel and unusual punishment. After five years, the Nevada Supreme Court upheld the decision. Throughout this time, Maxey regularly visited Darnell, offering support. He eventually admitted to a registrable sex offense, served probation, and earned an honorable discharge in 2021. This case taught Maxey the value of persistence, positivity, and kindness. Darnell taught me that no matter how many trials and tribulations life throws at you, always do the best you can, stay positive, and no matter what, be kind. 
    • Significance: This case taught Maxey that no matter how many trials and tribulations life throws at you, always do the best you can, stay positive, and no matter what, be kind

1. 2. In the Matter of J.G., a Subject Minor; 2013:

• • • Summary: J.G., a deaf 13-year-old, was incorrectly deemed incompetent due to miscommunication during his evaluation. He used "home signs" that standard ASL interpreters couldn't translate accurately, and no Certified Deaf Interpreter (CDI) was provided. As a result, J.G. was placed in juvenile sex offense treatment without proper communication support, leading to further misinterpretations and his detention in a "hearing only" group home.
    • Significance: Maxey filed motions to ensure J.G. received both ASL and CDI interpreters. Once provided, J.G. was deemed competent, completed all court orders, and successfully finished probation without reoffending. This case highlighted for Maxey the critical importance of accurate and appropriate communication support in legal proceedings.

• • Time in Court: Approximately 100% of her practice has involved trial litigation, with 3% involving appellate work.
  • Total Trials: 25
    • Jury: 0
    • Bench: 25
  • Estimate percentage of time spent:
    • Domestic/family: 20%
    • Juvenile matters: 80%
    • Trial court civil: 95% 

• Appellate civil: 3%

• Trial court criminal: 5% 

• Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada:
  • Position: Volunteer Attorney
  • Mission: Provides pro bono legal services to underserved populations.
• Clark County Defender's Union
  • Mission: Advocate for the rights and interests of public defenders.
  • Positions: Board Member, Vice President, President, and current member.
• Rosel Seastrand Performing Arts Foundation
  • Mission: Support performing arts in the community.
  • Position: Volunteer Choreographer.

Community Outreach Activities: Volunteered for environmental clean-ups at the wetlands, donated water to homeless shelters, contributed food to no-kill animal shelters, volunteered for Four Square, and personally prepared and distributed lunches to homeless individuals throughout the valley.

Licensed since 2004; 20 years