Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 106 - REAL MORTGAGES
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 106.240 (2026)

Extinguishment of lien created by mortgage or deed of trust upon real property

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 106.240  Extinguishment of lien created by mortgage or deed of trust upon real property.  The lien heretofore or hereafter created of any mortgage or deed of trust upon any real property, appearing of record, and not otherwise satisfied and discharged of record, shall at the expiration of 10 years after the debt secured by the mortgage or deed of trust according to the terms thereof or any recorded written extension thereof become wholly due, terminate, and it shall be conclusively presumed that the debt has been regularly satisfied and the lien discharged.

      [2:37:1917; 1919 RL p. 3352; NCL § 9410]—(NRS A 1965, 1229)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 109 cases (88 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Sfr Invs. Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 2022 NV 22 (Nev. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sfr Invs. Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 2022 NV 22 (Nev. 2022). · cites it 14× “: NRS 106.240 provides a means by which liens on real property are automatically cleared from the public records after a certain period of time.”
Pro-Max Corp. v. Feenstra, 16 P.3d 1074 (Nev. 2001). · cites it 15× “The primary issue presented in this appeal requires us to consider the scope of NRS 106.240, which extinguishes certain real property debts ten years after they become due absent recorded extensions, an issue of first impression.”
Posner v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 545 P.3d 1150 (Nev. 2024). · cites it 11× “: NRS 106.240 provides that certain liens on real property are automatically cleared from the public records after a specified period of time.”
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Ruddell, 380 F. Supp. 3d 1096 (D. Nev. 2019). · cites it 3× “The Court also finds that NRS 106.240 does not extend the applicable statute of limitations to a ten-year term.”
Bank of N.Y. v. S. Highlands Cmty. Ass'n, 329 F. Supp. 3d 1208 (D. Nev. 2018). · cites it 2× “ief claim is a defense to a future wrongful foreclosure claim by SFR if BONY proceeds with a foreclosure; (3) non-judicial foreclosures are not subject to a statute of limitations, so a declaratory relief claim seeking permission to foreclose likewise has no limitation period;…”
Bank of N.Y. v. Foothills at MacDonald Ranch Master Ass'n, 329 F. Supp. 3d 1221 (D. Nev. 2018). · cites it 2× “relief claim is a defense to a future wrongful foreclosure claim by SFR if BONY proceeds with a foreclosure; (3) non-judicial foreclosures are not subject to a statute of limitations, so a declaratory relief claim seeking permission to foreclose likewise has no limitation…”
Wishengrad v. Carrington Mortg. Servs., 529 P.3d 880 (Nev. 2023). · cites it 2× “1955) (a promissory note is "[a] written promise to pay a certain sum of money, at a future time unconditionally" (quoting Journal 5We are not persuaded that Carrington's counterclaims are otherwise preserved by NRS 106.240, as that provision is instructive on when a lien,…”
LV Debt Collect v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon (Nev. 2023). · cites it 42× “: NRS 106.240 provides that certain liens on real property are automatically cleared from the public records after a specified period of time.”
Valencia Mgmt. LLC Series 4 v. NewRez LLC (D. Nev. 2022). · cites it 29× “6 NewRez argues that this claim fails because the deed of trust was not extinguished by operation 7 of NRS § 106.240, as the 2010 notice of default was timely rescinded.”
SFR Investments Pool 1 LLC v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC (D. Nev. 2022). · cites it 28× “010, asserting that the deed of 19 trust has been extinguished by operation of NRS § 106.240. In its motions for injunctive relief, 20 SFR contends that the foreclosure sale should be enjoined because without the information that 21 Nationstar is required to provide under NRS §§…”
Daisy Trust v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n (D. Nev. 2021). · cites it 27× “3 Fannie Mae moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims by arguing that NRS 106.240 does not 4 apply to the facts here and therefore, cannot support Plaintiff’s request for quiet title, 5 declaratory relief, or injunctive relief.”
6344 Legend Falls Trust v. Nat'l Default Servicing Corp. (D. Nev. 2024). · cites it 26× “61), to the extent it dismissed 18 Plaintiff’s NRS 106.240 claim based on claim preclusion.”
Show all 109 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.