Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 11 - LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.060 (2026)

Action for recovery of mining claims: Occupation and possession; other applicable provisions

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 11.060  Action for recovery of mining claims: Occupation and possession; other applicable provisions.

      1.  No action for the recovery of mining claims, or for the recovery of the possession thereof, shall be maintained, unless it appears that the plaintiff, or those through or from whom the plaintiff claims, were seized or possessed of such mining claim, or were the owners thereof, according to the laws and customs of the district embracing the same, within 2 years before the commencement of such action.

      2.  Occupation and adverse possession of a mining claim shall consist in holding and working the same, in the usual and customary mode of holding and working similar claims in the vicinity thereof.

      3.  All of the provisions of this chapter which apply to other real estate, so far as applicable, shall be deemed to include and apply to mining claims; provided,

      (a) That in such application “2 years” shall be held to be the period intended whenever the term “5 years” is used; and

      (b) That when the terms “legal title” or “title” are used, they shall be held to include title acquired by location or occupation, according to the usages, laws and customs of the district embracing the claim.

      [1911 CPA § 9; RL § 4951; NCL § 8508]

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2021–2021 · leading case: Nat'L Gold Mining Corp. Vs. Hygrade Gold Co. Ltd. C/W 78984, No. 78685 (Nev. July 1, 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nat'L Gold Mining Corp. Vs. Hygrade Gold Co. Ltd. C/W 78984, No. 78685 (Nev. July 1, 2021). · cites it 2× “Ginsburg, 110 2The court rejected Hygrade's alternative theory of adverse possession under NRS 11.060. Further, the district court concluded that several unnamed parties—former WMC shareholders—had an ownership interest in the Group Two claims.”
Nat'L Gold Mining Corp. Vs. Hygrade Gold Co. Ltd. C/W 78984, No. 78685 (Nev. July 1, 2021). · cites it 2× “Ginsburg, 110 2The court rejected Hygrade's alternative theory of adverse possession under NRS 11.060. Further, the district court concluded that several unnamed parties—former WMC shareholders—had an ownership interest in the Group Two claims.”
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.