Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250 (2026)
Disabilities preventing running of statute
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 11.250 Disabilities preventing running of statute. If a person entitled to bring an action other
than for the recovery of real property be, at the time the cause of action
accrued, either:
1. Within the age of 18 years; or
2. Insane; or
3. In the custodial care of the State, if placed in such care while less than 18 years of age, except when the person is imprisoned, paroled or on probation,
Ê the time of such disability shall not be a part of the time limited for the commencement of the action.
[1911 CPA § 34; A 1951, 54]—(NRS A 1973, 1577; 1977, 1081)
ACTIONS BY OR ON BEHALF OF THIS STATE
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Butler Ex Rel. Biller v. Bayer, 168 P.3d 1055 (Nev. 2007).
Butler Ex Rel. Biller v. Bayer, 168 P.3d 1055 (Nev. 2007). “However, because Butler’s injuries rendered him “insane,” NRS 11.250 tolled the applicable statute of limitations, indicating that Butler’s claims against Smith were not time barred.”
Turner v. Staggs, 510 P.2d 879 (Nev. 1973). “It is, however, contended that the statutory 6-month period was tolled during the children's minority by reason of NRS 11.250 which provides that if a person is entitled to bring an action other than for the recovery of real property, the time within which the cause of action…”
Anthony Booth v. United States, 914 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2019). “§ 27-2-401 (1); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250 ; Or. Rev. Stat.”
Monroe v. Columbia Sunrise Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 158 P.3d 1008 (Nev. 2007). “We reject Monroe’s contention that any “new claims” she added to her complaint regarding James’ postnatal care at Sunrise Children’s Hospital were brought after the general medical malpractice limitation period expired.”
Gibbs v. Giles, 607 P.2d 118 (Nev. 1980). “Giles argues, however, that she is entitled to full recovery because NRS 11.250(1 ) 5 applies to toll the statute during her infancy.”
Parker v. Chrysler Motors Corp. & Reno Dodge, Inc., 502 P.2d 111 (Nev. 1972). “The issue presented by this appeal is whether the bar of that statute applies to an action commenced by the decedent’s widow and heir, but acting solely as the guardian ad litem for the minor heirs of the decedent, in view of the statutes *562 governing wrongful death actions…”
Smith by & Through Smith v. City of Reno, 580 F. Supp. 591 (D. Nev. 1984). “Plaintiff does not dispute the applicability of this statute, but contends that *592 the limitations period has been tolled under NRS 11.250, which provides in part: If a person entitled to bring an action .”
Jewett v. Patt, 591 P.2d 1151 (Nev. 1979). “Perhaps the two year statute of limitations bars that action if properly interposed as a defense.”
Ash Springs Dev. Corp. v. O'Donnell, 603 P.2d 698 (Nev. 1979). “At the time of the alleged injury, when Karen Sue Crunk was fifteen years of age, NRS 11.250, the disability statute, applied until age 21; subsequently, the statute was amended, effective July 1, 1973 (when Karen Sue Crunk was sixteen years old), lowering the age of majority to…”
Doe v. State of Nevada, Ex. Rel., Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs. Div. of Child & Fam. Servs. (D. Nev. 2024). “NRS § 11.250. The 20 Supreme Court of Nevada has noted that “insanity” includes a “mental disability resulting in the 21 inability to manage one’s affairs.”
Luciano v. Saint Mary's Preferred Health Ins. Co. (Nev. 2016). “On appeal, we must determine whether the district court erred in concluding that appellant was not "insane" under NRS 11.250, thereby tolling the statute of limitations for his negligence claim.”
Velasco v. Balaam (D. Nev. 2024). “Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250 (1)–(3). If Velasco is arguing that 6 he was preparing a § 1983 claim regarding the alleged destruction of his extradition paperwork, 7 the two-year statute of limitations had long passed by the time he entered SDCC in 2022.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250(1) — 2 cases
Humphries v. Button (D. Nev. 2024).
Harrison v. Rodriguez, 701 P.2d 1015 (Nev. 1985).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.250(1)(3) — 1 case
Parker v. Chrysler Motors Corp. & Reno Dodge, Inc., 502 P.2d 111 (Nev. 1972). “The issue presented by this appeal is whether the bar of that statute applies to an action commenced by the decedent’s widow and heir, but acting solely as the guardian ad litem for the minor heirs of the decedent, in view of the statutes *562 governing wrongful death actions…”
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.