NRS
115.010 Exemption from sale on execution and from process of court;
amount of exemption; exceptions; extension of exemption.
1. The homestead is not subject to forced
sale on execution or any final process from any court, except as otherwise
provided by subsections 2, 3 and 5, and NRS
115.090 and except as otherwise required by federal law.
2. The exemption provided in subsection 1
extends only to that amount of equity in the property held by the claimant
which does not exceed $605,000 in value, unless allodial title has been
established and not relinquished, in which case the exemption provided in
subsection 1 extends to all equity in the dwelling, its appurtenances and the
land on which it is located.
3. Except as otherwise provided in
subsection 4, the exemption provided in subsection 1 does not extend to process
to enforce the payment of obligations contracted for the purchase of the
property, or for improvements made thereon, including any mechanic’s lien
lawfully obtained, or for legal taxes, or for:
(a) Any mortgage or deed of trust thereon
executed and given, including, without limitation, any second or subsequent
mortgage, mortgage obtained through refinancing, line of credit taken against
the property and a home equity loan; or
(b) Any lien to which prior consent has been
given through the acceptance of property subject to any recorded declaration of
restrictions, deed restriction, restrictive covenant or equitable servitude,
specifically including any lien in favor of an association pursuant to NRS 116.3116 or 117.070,
Ê by both
spouses, when that relation exists.
4. If allodial title has been established
and not relinquished, the exemption provided in subsection 1 extends to process
to enforce the payment of obligations contracted for the purchase of the
property, and for improvements made thereon, including any mechanic’s lien
lawfully obtained, and for legal taxes levied by a state or local government,
and for:
(a) Any mortgage or deed of trust thereon; and
(b) Any lien even if prior consent has been given
through the acceptance of property subject to any recorded declaration of
restrictions, deed restriction, restrictive covenant or equitable servitude,
specifically including any lien in favor of an association pursuant to NRS 116.3116 or 117.070,
Ê unless a
waiver for the specific obligation to which the judgment relates has been
executed by all allodial titleholders of the property.
5. Establishment of allodial title does
not exempt the property from forfeiture pursuant to NRS 179.1156 to 179.121, inclusive, 179.1211 to 179.1235, inclusive, or 207.350 to 207.520, inclusive.
6. Any declaration of homestead which has
been filed before July 1, 2007, shall be deemed to have been amended on that
date by extending the homestead exemption commensurate with any increase in the
amount of equity held by the claimant in the property selected and claimed for
the exemption up to the amount permitted by law on that date, but the increase
does not impair the right of any creditor to execute upon the property when
that right existed before July 1, 2007.
[Part 1:72:1865; A 1879,
140; 1949,
51; 1943 NCL § 3315]—(NRS A 1965,
28; 1971,
575; 1975,
215, 981;
1977,
933, 1492;
1979,
984; 1981,
625; 1983,
104, 662;
1985,
13; 1989,
3, 646;
1991,
579; 1995,
225; 1997,
3419; 2003,
879, 1008;
2005,
1010, 2226;
2007,
205, 3026;
2017,
781; 2019,
290)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
31
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case:
Savage v. Pierson, 157 P.3d 697 (Nev. 2007).
Savage v. Pierson, 157 P.3d 697 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 8× “005(1) as “the amount that is determined by subtracting from the fair market value of the property the value of any liens excepted from the homestead exemption pursuant to subsection 3 of NRS 115.010 or NRS 115.090.” By definition then, “equity” is the fair market value of the…”
Contrevo v. Mercury Fin. Co., 153 P.3d 652 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 9× “150 cannot attach to property that is fully exempt from execution under NRS 115.010 The certified question involves the interplay between Nevada’s abstract judgment lien statute and Nevada’s homestead statutes.”
In Re Contrevo, 153 P.3d 652 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 9× “150 cannot attach to property that is fully exempt from execution under NRS 115.010 The certified question involves the interplay between Nevada's abstract judgment lien statute and Nevada's homestead statutes.”
Aguirre, Jr. v. Elko Cty. Sheriff's Off., 2022 NV 32 (Nev. 2022).
· cites it 20× “Applying de novo review to the district court's conclusion that the Property did not qualify for a homestead exemption under NRS 115.010 based on Aguirre's residency status, Torres v.”
Breedlove v. Breedlove, 691 P.2d 426 (Nev. 1984).
· cites it 8× “Shortly after the trust was set aside, respondent filed a homestead exemption on his home pursuant to NRS 115.010, [1] again *427 frustrating appellant in her attempt to execute on the judgment.”
Maki v. Chong, 75 P.3d 376 (Nev. 2003).
· cites it 3× “OPINION Per Curiam: Appellant Charles Maki has appealed in proper person from a district court order declaring that real property owned by Maki’s sister, respondent Esther Chong, was not subject to execution because of a properly filed homestead declaration under NRS 115.010.…”
In re: Robert A. Alexander & Gloria J. Alexander, 472 B.R. 815 (9th Cir. BAP 2012).
· cites it 2× “The Court noted that NRS § 115.010(2) limits homestead exemptions “only to that amount of equity in property held by the claimant which does not exceed $350,000 in value.”
In Re Sanford, 403 B.R. 831 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2009).
· cites it 4× “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 115.010 (2003). As a result, all of his equity would have been fully exempt.”
Wallace v. Rogers, 513 F.3d 212 (5th Cir. 2008).
“Nev.Rev.Stat. § 115.010(2). 5 . See In re Anderson, 374 B.”
Herndon v. Grilz, 920 P.2d 998 (Nev. 1996).
· cites it 5× “] NRS 115.010 (1993) provides the following statutory limitation to the homestead exemption: 1.”
In Re Sullivan, 200 B.R. 682 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1996).
· cites it 5× “When Estate of David Walley was decided in 1876, the provisions now found at NRS 115.010(3)(a) did not exist. That statute states that the homestead exemption does not extend to “[a]ny mortgage or deed of trust thereon executed and given.”
In Re Virissimo, 332 B.R. 201 (Bankr. D. Nev. 2005).
“§ 115.010. The Nevada constitution provides that the homestead provided by law shall be exempt from forced sale, Nev.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(1) — 6 cases
Contrevo v. Mercury Fin. Co., 153 P.3d 652 (Nev. 2007).
“150 cannot attach to property that is fully exempt from execution under NRS 115.010 The certified question involves the interplay between Nevada’s abstract judgment lien statute and Nevada’s homestead statutes.”
In Re Contrevo, 153 P.3d 652 (Nev. 2007).
“150 cannot attach to property that is fully exempt from execution under NRS 115.010 The certified question involves the interplay between Nevada's abstract judgment lien statute and Nevada's homestead statutes.”
Savage v. Pierson, 157 P.3d 697 (Nev. 2007).
“005(1) as “the amount that is determined by subtracting from the fair market value of the property the value of any liens excepted from the homestead exemption pursuant to subsection 3 of NRS 115.010 or NRS 115.090.” By definition then, “equity” is the fair market value of the…”
Aguirre, Jr. v. Elko Cty. Sheriff's Off., 2022 NV 32 (Nev. 2022).
“Applying de novo review to the district court's conclusion that the Property did not qualify for a homestead exemption under NRS 115.010 based on Aguirre's residency status, Torres v.”
Maki v. Chong, 75 P.3d 376 (Nev. 2003).
“OPINION Per Curiam: Appellant Charles Maki has appealed in proper person from a district court order declaring that real property owned by Maki’s sister, respondent Esther Chong, was not subject to execution because of a properly filed homestead declaration under NRS 115.010.…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(2) — 12 cases
Savage v. Pierson, 157 P.3d 697 (Nev. 2007).
“005(1) as “the amount that is determined by subtracting from the fair market value of the property the value of any liens excepted from the homestead exemption pursuant to subsection 3 of NRS 115.010 or NRS 115.090.” By definition then, “equity” is the fair market value of the…”
In re: Robert A. Alexander & Gloria J. Alexander, 472 B.R. 815 (9th Cir. BAP 2012).
“The Court noted that NRS § 115.010(2) limits homestead exemptions “only to that amount of equity in property held by the claimant which does not exceed $350,000 in value.”
Wallace v. Rogers, 513 F.3d 212 (5th Cir. 2008).
“Nev.Rev.Stat. § 115.010(2). 5 . See In re Anderson, 374 B.”
Contrevo v. Mercury Fin. Co., 153 P.3d 652 (Nev. 2007).
“150 cannot attach to property that is fully exempt from execution under NRS 115.010 The certified question involves the interplay between Nevada’s abstract judgment lien statute and Nevada’s homestead statutes.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(2)(b) — 1 case
Breedlove v. Breedlove, 691 P.2d 426 (Nev. 1984).
“Shortly after the trust was set aside, respondent filed a homestead exemption on his home pursuant to NRS 115.010, [1] again *427 frustrating appellant in her attempt to execute on the judgment.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(3) — 2 cases
Maki v. Chong, 75 P.3d 376 (Nev. 2003).
“OPINION Per Curiam: Appellant Charles Maki has appealed in proper person from a district court order declaring that real property owned by Maki’s sister, respondent Esther Chong, was not subject to execution because of a properly filed homestead declaration under NRS 115.010.…”
Aguirre, Jr. v. Elko Cty. Sheriff's Off., 2022 NV 32 (Nev. 2022).
“Applying de novo review to the district court's conclusion that the Property did not qualify for a homestead exemption under NRS 115.010 based on Aguirre's residency status, Torres v.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(3)(a) — 1 case
In Re Sullivan, 200 B.R. 682 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1996).
“When Estate of David Walley was decided in 1876, the provisions now found at NRS 115.010(3)(a) did not exist. That statute states that the homestead exemption does not extend to “[a]ny mortgage or deed of trust thereon executed and given.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(5) — 1 case
Aguirre, Jr. v. Elko Cty. Sheriff's Off., 2022 NV 32 (Nev. 2022).
“Applying de novo review to the district court's conclusion that the Property did not qualify for a homestead exemption under NRS 115.010 based on Aguirre's residency status, Torres v.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 115.010(l) — 1 case
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.