each drug company internally and is then published to the marketplace as the price for the drug. 6 Tolbert testified that TAP uses the terminology, “customer-of-record” to refer to wholesalers whose licenses have been verified and to whom TAP directly sells drugs; she testified that TAP does not use the term “authorized distributor.” The parties do not dispute that in this circumstance, a customer-of-record is analogous to an authorized distributor. 7 Torrealba v. Kesmetis, 124 Nev. 95, 178 P.3d 716 (2008). 8 State, Tax Comm’n v. Nevada Cement Co., 117 Nev. 960, 968-69, 36 P.3d 418, 423 (2001). 9 NRS 639.255(l)(f). 10 Meridian Gold v. State, Dep’t of Taxation, 119 Nev. 630, 633, 81 P.3d 516, 518 (2003). 11 See Yoder v. Ohio State Bd. of Educ., 531 N.E.2d 769, 770 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988) (<HOLDING>). 12 See American Beef Packers, Inc. v. U.S.
holding that federal courts should apply state substantive law holding that where state rules of civil procedure apply to courts of the state they do not apply to adjudicatory proceedings before state agencies recognizing that state agencies which are independent of the state are citizens of the state holding that the federal rules of civil procedure apply in diversity eases where they are on point unless they both directly conflict with state law and are invalid under the constitution or the rules enabling act holding discovery rules apply to civil forfeiture proceedings