Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 112 - FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS (UNIFORM ACT)
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 112.250 (2026)

Construction of chapter

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 112.250  Construction of chapter.  This chapter must be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.

      (Added to NRS by 1987, 14)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2007–2015 · leading case: Herup v. First Boston Fin., LLC, 162 P.3d 870 (Nev. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Herup v. First Boston Fin., LLC, 162 P.3d 870 (Nev. 2007). “24 NRS 112.250 directs this court to apply and construe the UFTA in Nevada “to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.”
Leonard v. Coolidge (In Re Nat'l Audit Def. Network), 367 B.R. 207 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2007). “§ 112.250 (“This chapter must be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.”
The Cadle Co. Vs. Woods & Erickson c/w 63790, 2015 NV 15 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 2× “2004); see NRS 112.250 ("This chapter must be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.”
The Cadle Co. Vs. Woods & Erickson c/w 63790, 2015 NV 15 (Nev. 2015). “2004); see NRS 112.250 ("This chapter must be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.”
The Cadle Co. Vs. Woods & Erickson c/w 63790, 2015 NV 15 (Nev. 2015). “2004); see NRS 112.250 ("This chapter must be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of this chapter among states enacting it.”
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.