Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 116 - COMMON-INTEREST OWNERSHIP (UNIFORM ACT)
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.31065 (2026)

Rules

✓ 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 116.31065  Rules.  The rules adopted by an association:

      1.  Must be reasonably related to the purpose for which they are adopted.

      2.  Must be sufficiently explicit in their prohibition, direction or limitation to inform a person of any action or omission required for compliance.

      3.  Must not be adopted to evade any obligation of the association.

      4.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 1 of NRS 116.335, must be consistent with the governing documents of the association and must not arbitrarily restrict conduct or require the construction of any capital improvement by a unit’s owner that is not required by the governing documents of the association.

      5.  Must be uniformly enforced under the same or similar circumstances against all units’ owners. Any rule that is not so uniformly enforced may not be enforced against any unit’s owner.

      6.  May be enforced by the association through the imposition of a fine only if the association complies with the requirements set forth in NRS 116.31031.

      (Added to NRS by 1997, 3111; A 1999, 3004; 2003, 2269; 2025, 2382)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2022–2022 · leading case: Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Hoa, Inc., 507 P.3d 199 (Nev. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Hoa, Inc., 507 P.3d 199 (Nev. 2022). · cites it 2× “See NRS 116.31065(1), (2), and (4). In weighing the interests discussed above, we conclude that public policy interests and Nevada's strong protection of private property owners expectations and ownership rights are best served by adopting the Restatement's approach.”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.31065(1): 1 case
Moretto v. Elk Point Country Club Hoa, Inc., 507 P.3d 199 (Nev. 2022). “See NRS 116.31065(1), (2), and (4). In weighing the interests discussed above, we conclude that public policy interests and Nevada's strong protection of private property owners expectations and ownership rights are best served by adopting the Restatement's approach.”
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.