2026 Las Vegas Family Court Research Study (2026)

Every family law case is different. The strategy should be, too.

Drawing on our experience representing Nevada families, we examined 447 completed cases to better understand the factors associated with legal costs, case duration, and resolution. Our findings highlight why understanding the issues, evaluating options, and choosing the appropriate approach to representation matter from the beginning.

What our research revealed

Detailed figures, sample sizes, and the methodology appear below.

What drives the cost and duration of a Nevada family law case?

Cost and duration varied widely by case type and by the scope of legal work. Across all billing arrangements, the typical custody client paid $8,248 and the typical divorce client $5,104. Annulments and name changes clustered tightly around the firm’s flat fees. As the following sections show, the gap between divorce and custody here largely reflects how many divorces were flat-fee matters.

Average payments were higher than median payments for most case types

For every case type except flat-fee name changes, the average amount paid was higher than the median, in divorce by more than double.

A single “average cost” figure is often pulled up by the most expensive matters and can say little about a typical one.

Flat-fee and hourly divorce matters involved different financial and time commitments

About a quarter of the divorces in the dataset were handled for a flat fee. At this firm, flat fees are generally used for divorces in which the spouses have reached, or expect to reach, full agreement. Those matters cost far less and concluded far sooner than divorces billed hourly.

Flat-fee amounts in the dataset reflect fees in effect when matters were opened in 2023 and 2024 and are not current pricing. They also vary: 30 of the 44 flat-fee divorces with final payments paid between $2,000 and $3,650, 9 paid under $1,000, which may reflect limited-scope services or partial payments, and the rest paid other amounts.

Hourly custody and divorce matters showed similar costs

Across all matters, custody appears to cost about 62% more than divorce. That comparison is misleading on its own, because nearly all custody matters were billed hourly while about a quarter of divorces were flat-fee matters. Comparing hourly matters only, the typical custody matter cost $9,017 and the typical divorce $9,713. Hourly custody matters concluded somewhat sooner: 228 days, compared with 258 for hourly divorces.

The data does not show why costs were similar. One possibility is that the work overlaps, since most divorces in the dataset involved children, but the study does not test that.

Litigation activity

Using hearing counts recorded at file closing or in court-attendance time entries, the median was two hearings for both divorce and custody matters, and roughly one in six matters of each type had four or more (17% of divorces and 18% of custody matters).

Based on 89 completed divorce and 68 completed custody matters, opened January 2023 through October 2026, with a recorded or billed hearing count. Matters whose counts were estimated only from case documents are excluded.

Resolution patterns

A reliable resolution classification was available for 155 of 336 completed divorces and 33 of 203 completed custody matters opened from January 2023 through October 2026. Among those, 87% of divorces and 70% of custody matters settled by agreement; the rest were decided by a judge.

These percentages describe only the matters with a reliable classification and should not be read as rates for all matters. The custody sample in particular is small.

Did Family Court department assignment affect case duration or cost?

We also examined whether case duration and client payments differed across Clark County Family Court departments. The analysis compared matters of the same type and included only hourly matters, to reduce differences attributable to billing arrangements.

This analysis uses a different and larger population than the rest of the study: all completed hourly matters opened from January 2023 through October 2026 with a recorded department and the relevant duration or payment data, rather than only matters opened in 2023–2024. That provides more cases per department for an exploratory comparison.

Among the departments with at least 10 qualifying hourly divorce matters, the analysis did not detect a statistically significant difference in duration (14 departments, 187 matters, p = 0.40) or client payments (13 departments, 167 matters, p = 0.10). Among the 5 departments with at least 10 qualifying hourly custody matters, differences in duration (60 matters, p = 0.40) and client payments (58 matters, p = 0.27) also did not reach conventional statistical significance.

What this means. Individual departments showed different median durations and payments, but the available data did not establish that those differences reflect systematic differences between departments rather than ordinary variation between cases.

Limitations. Most departments had small samples, so these results are not proof that judicial assignment has no effect on outcomes, cost, or duration. The firm’s records measure the period from matter opening to the end of the firm’s work, not only time before the court, and historical changes in judicial assignments limit the ability to attribute individual matters to particular judges. For these reasons, the study does not rank or name individual judges or departments. The findings describe the firm’s historical experience and should not be used to predict how any particular court or judge will handle a future case.

Methodology and exclusions

Study population.

The study covers family law matters the firm opened from January 2023 through October 2026 in which the firm’s legal representation had concluded by October 2026. Court-appointed matters, post-decree work, matters outside Nevada, and case types with fewer than 30 completed matters are excluded.

The 447 matters below are the overall study population. Individual findings draw on subsets of it, such as matters billed hourly or matters with a recorded resolution, and each finding states its own sample size and period.

*Smaller sample; treat guardianship figures as a rough guide. Divorce and custody use matters opened in 2023–2024; see “Period” below.

Data source. Rosenblum Allen Law Firm’s case management records for family law matters opened from January 1, 2023, through October 24, 2026. Only aggregate figures are reported. No individual matter, client, judge, or court department is identified.

Completed matters. For purposes of this study, a matter is considered closed when substantive legal representation has concluded. Matters remaining administratively open for final billing, collections, payment arrangements, or file closure are included when legal work has concluded; the firm confirmed this for all such matters in the study population.

Post-decree work. A divorce matter whose decree or recorded resolution predates the firm’s engagement is treated as post-decree work, such as a modification or enforcement, and excluded from all divorce figures. Nineteen matters met this rule, 10 of them in the 2023–2024 study period: 5 identified by a decree date on file and 5 by a closure-survey resolution date that predates the engagement.

Duration cohort. For matters closed in the firm’s system, duration runs to the file-closing date. For 16 matters held open only for billing or collections, it runs to the date substantive legal work ended, as confirmed from the firm’s records. These endpoints are similar but not identical, since file closing can follow the end of legal work by an administrative interval. Thirteen matters held open for billing (3 divorce, 10 custody) could not be assigned a confirmed end date, because their case files are sealed, and are excluded from duration figures only.

Payment cohort. Payment figures include only matters closed in the firm’s system with no further financial activity expected. Thirty completed matters still being paid or in collections are excluded from payment figures, because their payments are not final.

Amount paid. Total paid to the firm by the client, net of trust refunds, including attorney fees and case costs billed through the firm. This is not the total cost of a case: it excludes amounts paid directly to others, such as some experts or private mediators. Matters with no client payments are excluded from cost figures.

Paid versus billed. No matter in the payment figures had an outstanding balance. For divorce and custody, clients paid about 93% of the amounts invoiced; the typical divorce was billed $5,557 and the typical custody matter $8,370. The difference reflects amounts billed but not collected. For annulments, name changes, and guardianships, payments and invoices matched within about 2%. Most matters paid exactly what was billed (87 of 117 hourly divorces and 43 of 44 flat-fee divorces), so for divorce the billed and paid medians are the same: $9,713 for hourly and $2,550 for flat-fee matters. The difference shows up in averages, which reflect the matters that paid less than billed: hourly divorces averaged $18,798 billed and $17,386 paid. For hourly custody matters, the median billed was $9,241, within 6% of hourly divorces. The comparative findings therefore hold on billed amounts.

Duration. Days from the date the firm opened the matter to the end of the firm’s work, as defined above. This includes work before filing and after the final order, so it differs from time on the court docket.

Period. For divorce and custody, cost and duration figures use matters opened in 2023 and 2024, because longer matters opened more recently are still in progress and would bias the figures downward. Name changes, annulments, and guardianships use the full period.

Billing arrangement. “Hourly” includes standard hourly and evergreen-retainer matters. Of the 184 divorce matters, 48 were flat fee and 131 hourly; the remaining 5 (4 with no billing arrangement recorded and 1 pro bono) are excluded from billing comparisons. In the payment cohort, 44 flat-fee and 117 hourly divorces had final client payments. Of the 108 custody matters, 102 were hourly (86 with final payments) and 6 were flat fee, too few to report separately.

Hearings. Counts recorded in the firm’s closure survey or derived from court-attendance time entries, for completed matters opened January 2023 through October 2026. Counts estimated only from case documents are excluded.

Resolution. Classifications recorded in the firm’s closure survey or taken from the case-ending document, for completed matters opened January 2023 through October 2026. Classifications inferred from filed-document names, and matters recorded as “other / no decision,” are excluded.

Department analysis. Completed hourly divorce and custody matters opened from January 2023 through October 2026 with a recorded Family Court department, limited to departments with at least 10 such matters of the same case type. Duration comparisons use the duration cohort and payment comparisons the payment cohort, as defined above. Differences across departments were tested with the Kruskal–Wallis test, a nonparametric test for differences among groups that does not assume normally distributed data, with correction for tied values. Departments are those recorded in the firm’s system at the time of analysis; judicial reassignments during the period are not tracked.

Definitions. Divorce includes divorces with and without children. The median is the middle value; the “middle half” runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile.

Excluded. Court-appointed dependency matters, post-decree work, matters filed outside Nevada, and case types with fewer than 30 completed matters, including adoption, child support, protective orders, and uncategorized matters.

Limitations

• These are one firm’s matters in the Las Vegas area, not all family law cases in Nevada, and fees vary between firms and attorneys.
• Duration endpoints differ slightly between matters closed in the firm’s system and matters held open only for billing, and 13 completed matters without a confirmed end date are excluded from duration figures.
• Payment figures exclude 30 completed matters whose payments are not yet final, which may understate amounts paid.
• Post-decree matters are identified by a date rule, not by individual file review, so a small number may be misclassified.
• Billing arrangement is used as an indicator of whether a divorce was agreed; it is not a direct measure of agreement.
• Resolution and hearing data are available for only part of the dataset, as described above.

Citation and research contact

Journalists and researchers are welcome to use these figures with attribution. For questions about the data or methodology, contact our office.