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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 11.300 (2026)

Absence from State suspends running of statute

✓ 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 11.300  Absence from State suspends running of statute.  If, when the cause of action shall accrue against a person, the person is out of the State, the action may be commenced within the time herein limited after the person’s return to the State; and if after the cause of action shall have accrued the person departs from the State, the time of the absence shall not be part of the time prescribed for the commencement of the action.

      [1911 CPA § 33; RL § 4975; NCL § 8532]

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1962–1983 · leading case: Lindauer v. Allen, 456 P.2d 851 (Nev. 1969).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lindauer v. Allen, 456 P.2d 851 (Nev. 1969). · cites it 3× “Relying on NRS 11.300 3 together with that part of NRCP 41(e), which reads as follows: “.”
Seely v. Illinois-California Express, Inc., 541 F. Supp. 1307 (D. Nev. 1982). · cites it 7× “Plaintiff asserts that the statute of limitations was tolled both as to the individual defendant and the defendant foreign corporation pursuant to NRS 11.300, which provides as follows: “Absence from state suspends running of statute.”
Bank of Nevada v. Friedman, 420 P.2d 1 (Nev. 1966). · cites it 3× “The tolling statute, NRS 11.300, provides: “If, when the cause of action shall accrue against a person, he be out of the state, the action may be commenced within the time herein limited after his return to the *420 state; and if after the cause of action shall have accrued he…”
Brown v. Vonsild, 541 P.2d 528 (Nev. 1975). · cites it 7× “*647 OPINION Per Curiam: The principal issue presented for our consideration in this appeal is whether the 6-year statute of limitations applicable to child support installments was tolled under the provisions of NRS 11.300 by the absence of the defendant husband from the State…”
Simmons v. Trivelpiece, 643 P.2d 1219 (Nev. 1982). “Appellant asserts that through the operation of NRS 11.300, defendant, a resident of California, could not invoke the protection of the applicable statutes of limitations.”
Blotzke v. Christmas Tree, Inc., 499 P.2d 647 (Nev. 1972). “The appellant contends that his action was timely commenced since he alleged a breach of an implied contract to provide a safe place to work, thus avoiding the bar of limitations applicable to personal injuries and gaining the benefit of a longer period of time within which to…”
Cal-Farm Ins. Co. v. Oliver, 375 P.2d 857 (Nev. 1962). “Appellant contends, however, that by virtue of NRS 11.300 the statute was tolled. The lower court held that the claim was barred upon *481 the expiration of three years because the tolling statute had no application to actions where service is made upon the Secretary of State…”
Los Angeles Airways, Inc. v. Est. of Hughes, 659 P.2d 871 (Nev. 1983). · cites it 7× “2 The district court also found that the statutory limitations periods were not tolled under NRS 11.300 3 during Howard Hughes’ absence from Nevada, and therefore lapsed before LAA filed its lawsuit *168 against the Hughes interests.”
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.