Alexander M. Falconi
This site is not Alexander Falconi's site and is not affiliated with, authorized by, or written by him or by Our Nevada Judges, Inc. It reproduces public court records about him, with citations.

"A messy split," and the file that ran eleven years

On a business interview show he called his custody case "a little bit of a messy split" that he "did resolve." The file ran from 2008 to 2016 and went to the Supreme Court five times.

On camera

"About two years into college ... had a child, and then that ended up in a little bit of a messy split, and a child custody dispute came out. So eventually I did resolve that issue, and I went back to school."

"Interview Of Alexander Falconi," Profiles in Business, published by Our Nevada Judges June 5, 2019, at 0:44

In the file

"Father's failure to request leave to conduct discovery was not 'creative,' but rather violation of NRCP 16.21's clear language"; "Father has violated NRCP 11(b)(2)."

Order, No. FV08-03200, January 2, 2013 (NSC No. 69341, Record on Appeal Vol. 8, pp. 143-145). More

"Mr. Falconi is willfully underemployed for the purposes of avoiding court ordered support payments"; "he is not indigent."

Order Denying In Forma Pauperis, No. FV08-03200, January 13, 2014 (filed in NSC No. 64551). More

"Mr. Falconi may not unilaterally alter this Court's Order ... Mr. Falconi's refusal to permit visitation was pretextual and inappropriate."

Order, No. FV08-03200, January 11, 2016 (NSC No. 69341, Record on Appeal Vol. 17, pp. 101-102). More
Note. The custody case he describes as resolved opened in 2008 and was still producing orders against him in 2016; by the date of the interview he had taken it to the Supreme Court five times (Nos. 57516, 64551, 69341, 73469 and 77848, the last docketed in January 2019). The dockets.
Standard. The excerpt is cut from the video Our Nevada Judges published, with its picture, sound and on-screen labels unaltered, and the full video is linked at the time mark. The on-camera quotation was transcribed from the video and checked a second time by machine; the time mark opens the video where the words begin so the reader can hear them. Each answer from the record is a quotation from a filed document, cited to the page. Nothing is characterized; where the two are set side by side, the reader draws the conclusion.

All of his public statements against the record