Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125B.050 (2026)

Period of limitations

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 125B.050  Period of limitations.

      1.  If there is no court order for support, any demand in writing to a parent not having physical custody for payment of support on behalf of a minor child, mailed to the last known address of the parent, tolls the running of the statute of limitations for the bringing of an action for that support.

      2.  A motion for relief after judgment and an independent action to enforce a judgment for support of a child may be commenced at any time.

      3.  If a court has issued an order for the support of a child, there is no limitation on the time in which an action may be commenced to:

      (a) Collect arrearages in the amount of that support; or

      (b) Seek reimbursement of money paid as public assistance for that child.

      (Added to NRS by 1983, 1867; A 1987, 2252)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 126.263)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1993–2016 · leading case: State of Washington v. Bagley, 963 P.2d 498 (Nev. 1998).
State of Washington v. Bagley, 963 P.2d 498 (Nev. 1998). · cites it 31× “On July 1, 1987, the legislature eliminated the period of limitation with the addition of subsection 3 to NRS 125B.050 (formerly NRS 126.263). This subsection provides: 3.”
In Re Anders, 151 B.R. 543 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1993). · cites it 2× “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 125B.050(1), § 125B.080(5) (Michie 1991).”
Davidson Vs. Davidson, 2016 NV 71 (Nev. 2016). · cites it 4× “, NRS 125B.050 (allowing enforcement of a child support order without a time limitation for commencing the action).”
Davidson Vs. Davidson, 2016 NV 71 (Nev. 2016). · cites it 2× “, NRS 125B.050 (allowing enforcement of a child support order without a time limitation for commencing the action).”
Bouydston (Russell) v. State (Nev. 2013). “Although the order appears to have been in effect only while the children were physically in Social Services' care and does not order repayment of all expenses incurred by Social Services, because the court issued an order of support there is no limitation on the time in which…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125B.050(1) — 1 case
In Re Anders, 151 B.R. 543 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1993). “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 125B.050(1), § 125B.080(5) (Michie 1991).”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 125B.050(3) — 2 cases
State of Washington v. Bagley, 963 P.2d 498 (Nev. 1998). “On July 1, 1987, the legislature eliminated the period of limitation with the addition of subsection 3 to NRS 125B.050 (formerly NRS 126.263). This subsection provides: 3.”
Bouydston (Russell) v. State (Nev. 2013). “Although the order appears to have been in effect only while the children were physically in Social Services' care and does not order repayment of all expenses incurred by Social Services, because the court issued an order of support there is no limitation on the time in which…”
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.