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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.150 (2026)

Additional requirements for adverse possession: Occupation continuously for 5 years; payment of taxes

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 11.150  Additional requirements for adverse possession: Occupation continuously for 5 years; payment of taxes.  In no case shall adverse possession be considered established unless it be shown, in addition to the requirements of NRS 11.120 or 11.140, that the land has been occupied and claimed for the period of 5 years, continuously, and that the party or persons, their predecessors and grantors have paid all taxes, state, county and municipal, which may have been levied and assessed against the land for the period mentioned, or have tendered payment thereof.

      [1911 CPA § 18; A 1937, 26; 1931 NCL § 8517]—(NRS A 1957, 321)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2024 · leading case: Horgan v. Felton, 170 P.3d 982 (Nev. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Horgan v. Felton, 170 P.3d 982 (Nev. 2007). · cites it 2× “[7] See NRS 11.150. [8] Seven Lakes Development Co.”
Dayton Valley Investors, LLC v. Union Pac. R.R., 664 F. Supp. 2d 1174 (D. Nev. 2009). · cites it 6× “110 through Nev.Rev.Stat. § 11.150 “allow a party to assert his possession against a known claimant,” while Nev.”
Potts v. Vokits, 692 P.2d 1304 (Nev. 1985). · cites it 3× “110 through NRS 11.150 allow a party to assert his possession against a known claimant, while NRS 40.”
White Pine Lumber Co. v. City of Reno, 801 P.2d 1370 (Nev. 1990). · cites it 3× “1 Although Nevada has two adverse possession statutes, NRS 11.150 (five years) and NRS 40.090 (fifteen years), NRS 40.”
Crumbaker v. Kelly, 601 P.2d 1199 (Nev. 1979). · cites it 6× “The district court concluded that respondents, as mortgagees in possession, had satisfied all the statutory requirements of adverse possession pursuant to the provisions of NRS 11.150. Respondents conveyed property described as lots 18, 19 and 20 in block 54 of Goldfield,…”
Biasi v. Leavitt, 692 P.2d 1301 (Nev. 1985). · cites it 2× “The sole issue on appeal is whether respondent satisfactorily established his compliance with the statutory requirement of NRS 11.150 that a party pay all taxes assessed against the land in question for a period of five years before adverse possession can be established.”
Franktown Creek Irrigation Co. v. Marlette Lake Co., 364 P.2d 1069 (Nev. 1961). “of water diverted by Marlette’s predecessor) for the statutory period, the record on appeal does not tend to establish that such use was adverse and under a claim of right. The opposite appears to be true.”
Triplett v. David H. Fulstone Co., 849 P.2d 334 (Nev. 1993). “See NRS 11.150. Because we believe the evidence adduced below affirmatively established adverse possession by clear and competent proof, we affirm the judgment of the district court.”
Sutro Tunnel Co. v. Lipscomb, 720 P.2d 1204 (Nev. 1986). “NRS 11.150 (requiring claimant to pay taxes on property for a period of five years in order to prevail on a claim of adverse possession on the theory that taxes will be paid only once and that owner who has not paid his taxes may properly be divested of his property).”
Brundy v. Bramlet, 692 P.2d 493 (Nev. 1985). · cites it 3× “090 or NRS 11.150. 1 The court concluded that, because respondent had paid the water assessments upon the subject property between 1975 and 1981, appellants did not satisfy the statutory requirements.”
Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas v. United States, 28 Fed. Cl. 95 (Fed. Cl. 1993). “, 1st Sess. (1983), if enacted, would authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to pay a sum to be determined based upon an advisory opinion rendered by this court in settlement of all claims of the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas under the ICCA pertaining to the lands in east…”
Jones v. Ghadiri, 546 P.3d 831 (Nev. 2024). “" NRS 11.150. A prescriptive easement is a common law claim by which one may acquire the legal right to use land that he or she does not own.”
Show all 14 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.