Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 111 - ESTATES IN PROPERTY; CONVEYANCING AND RECORDING

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 111.220

Agreements not in writing: When void

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 111.220  Agreements not in writing: When void.  In the following cases every agreement is void, unless the agreement, or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration, is in writing, and subscribed by the person charged therewith:

      1.  Every agreement that, by the terms, is not to be performed within 1 year from the making thereof.

      2.  Every special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another.

      3.  Every promise or undertaking made upon consideration of marriage, except mutual promises to marry.

      4.  Every promise or commitment to loan money or to grant or extend credit in an original principal amount of at least $100,000 made by a person engaged in the business of lending money or extending credit.

      5.  Every promise or commitment to pay a fee for obtaining a loan of money or an extension of credit for another person if the fee is $1,000 or more.

      [61:9:1861; B § 289; BH § 2630; C § 2700; RL § 1075; NCL § 1533]—(NRS A 1989, 285)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1959–2025 · leading case: Tore, Ltd. v. Church
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Tore, Ltd. v. Church (1989) nev · cites it 3× “Second, assuming the existence of a guaranty promise, the question of whether the promise necessitates a writing under NRS 111.220 remains undetermined. Specifically, the “main purpose,” “original promise” or “leading object” doctrine constitutes an exception to the statute of…”
Insurance Co. of the West v. Gibson Tile Co. (2006) nev · cites it 2× “See NRS 111.220(2) (stating that "[e]very special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another" must be in writing in order to satisfy the statute of frauds).”
Harmon v. Tanner Motor Tours of Nevada, Ltd. (1963) nev · cites it 3× “, did those parties enter into an agreement? Third, was the “memorandum” of agreement, expressing the consideration, legally sufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds, NRS 111.220? Fourth, was the agreement properly the subject of a judgment directing its specific performance?…”
Tri-Pacific Commercial Brokerage, Inc. v. Boreta (1997) nev · cites it 4× “At trial, Voss maintained that the alleged guaranty agreement was valid and enforceable against Tri-Pacific because the writing satisfied the statute of frauds (pursuant to NRS 111.220), and because Chip had apparent authority to bind Tri-Pacific as a guarantor of the note.”
Atwell v. Southwest Securities (1991) nev · cites it 2× “" NRS 111.220(1). If an oral agreement is found to exist in this case, there is nothing to indicate it could not be performed within one year.”
Stone v. Mission Bay Mortgage Co. (1983) nev · cites it 2× “” 2 NRS 111.220 provides in pertinent part: In the following cases every agreement shall be void, unless such agreement, or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration, be in writing, and subscribed by the party charged therewith: 1.”
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Elmas Trading Corp. (1987) nvd · cites it 2× “Section 188 indicates that the law of the forum regarding offer and acceptance shall determine where the last act occurred which was necessary to make the contract binding.”
Kula v. Karat, Inc. (1975) nev · cites it 5× “However, if it did, such reliance was in error because NRS 111.220 1 renders void an agreement to answer for the debts of another which is not in writing.”
Tropicana Hotel Corp. v. Speer (1985) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 111.220. [3] This is shown by the testimony of Speer himself.”
Edwards Industries, Inc. v. DTE/BTE, Inc. (1996) nev “See NRS 111.220(1). 10 EHT asserts that the equipment agreement was taken out of the statute of frauds by any of the following: (1) admissions; (2) full performance; or (3) writings or memoranda of the agreement sufficient to meet the statute of frauds.”
Occhiuto v. Occhiuto (1981) nev “270 4 or NRS 111.220(3) bear upon this case. Other than his allegations of fraud, the entire thrust of appellant’s complaint is his contention that respondent orally agreed that upon any subsequent separation, she would reconvey to him one-half of her real property.”
Pentax Corp. v. Boyd (1995) nev “§ 38-10-112 (1)(b) (1973); NRS 111.220(2). To satisfy the statute of frauds, a contract must contain certain essential elements: “[A] note or memorandum ‘must show on its face or by reference to other writings, first, the names of the parties .”
Show all 35 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 111.220(1) — 9 cases
Atwell v. Southwest Securities (1991) nev “" NRS 111.220(1). If an oral agreement is found to exist in this case, there is nothing to indicate it could not be performed within one year.”
Edwards Industries, Inc. v. DTE/BTE, Inc. (1996) nev “See NRS 111.220(1). 10 EHT asserts that the equipment agreement was taken out of the statute of frauds by any of the following: (1) admissions; (2) full performance; or (3) writings or memoranda of the agreement sufficient to meet the statute of frauds.”
Harmon v. Tanner Motor Tours of Nevada, Ltd. (1963) nev “, did those parties enter into an agreement? Third, was the “memorandum” of agreement, expressing the consideration, legally sufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds, NRS 111.220? Fourth, was the agreement properly the subject of a judgment directing its specific performance?…”
Holloway v. King (2005) nysd
Stone v. Mission Bay Mortgage Co. (1983) nev “” 2 NRS 111.220 provides in pertinent part: In the following cases every agreement shall be void, unless such agreement, or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration, be in writing, and subscribed by the party charged therewith: 1.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 111.220(2) — 4 cases
Insurance Co. of the West v. Gibson Tile Co. (2006) nev “See NRS 111.220(2) (stating that "[e]very special promise to answer for the debt, default or miscarriage of another" must be in writing in order to satisfy the statute of frauds).”
Tore, Ltd. v. Church (1989) nev “Second, assuming the existence of a guaranty promise, the question of whether the promise necessitates a writing under NRS 111.220 remains undetermined. Specifically, the “main purpose,” “original promise” or “leading object” doctrine constitutes an exception to the statute of…”
Pentax Corp. v. Boyd (1995) nev “§ 38-10-112 (1)(b) (1973); NRS 111.220(2). To satisfy the statute of frauds, a contract must contain certain essential elements: “[A] note or memorandum ‘must show on its face or by reference to other writings, first, the names of the parties .”
McMillan v. Torre (1968) nev
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 111.220(3) — 1 case
Occhiuto v. Occhiuto (1981) nev “270 4 or NRS 111.220(3) bear upon this case. Other than his allegations of fraud, the entire thrust of appellant’s complaint is his contention that respondent orally agreed that upon any subsequent separation, she would reconvey to him one-half of her real property.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 111.220(4) — 3 cases
Pease v. Wachovia SBA Lending, Inc. (2010) md
Bart Street III v. ACC Enterprises, LLC (2020) nvd
Consolidated Services, Inc. v. KeyBank National Ass'n (1998) innd
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.