Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 136 - PROBATE OF WILLS AND PETITIONS FOR LETTERS
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 136.200 (2026)

Appointment of attorney to represent minors, unborn members of interested class or nonresidents; retention of other counsel

✓ 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 136.200  Appointment of attorney to represent minors, unborn members of interested class or nonresidents; retention of other counsel.

      1.  If a will is offered for probate and it appears there are minors or unborn members of a class who are interested, or if it appears there are other interested persons who reside out of the county and are unrepresented, the court may, whether there is a contest or not, appoint an attorney for them.

      2.  If a person for whom an attorney has been appointed, pursuant to subsection 1, retains counsel and notifies the court of the retention, the court shall enter an order relieving the court-appointed attorney of further obligation to represent the person.

      [16:107:1941; 1931 NCL § 9882.16]—(NRS A 1961, 409; 1967, 213; 1999, 2266)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1957–1984 · leading case: Flangas v. Herrmann, 677 P.2d 594 (Nev. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Flangas v. Herrmann, 677 P.2d 594 (Nev. 1984). “At the same hearing— Mary Louise Franklin, Ruth Fern Estep, and Ethel May Colthern being non-residents — Judge Waters appointed appellant *5 Flangas as their counsel pursuant to NRS 136.200. Subsequently, on March 20, 1973, Judge Waters appointed appellant Ross as co-counsel to…”
Matter of Est. of Herrmann, 677 P.2d 594 (Nev. 1984). “At the same hearing — Mary Louise Franklin, Ruth Fern Estep, and Ethel May Colthern being non-residents — Judge Waters appointed appellant Flangas as their counsel pursuant to NRS 136.200. Subsequently, on March 20, 1973, Judge Waters appointed appellant Ross as co-counsel to Mr.”
Breckenridge v. Andrews, 501 P.2d 657 (Nev. 1972). “” (This section was amended in 1961 by changing the word “shall” to “may,” and with that single change is now NRS 136.200, subsection 1.)”
Ray v. Barringer, 314 P.2d 378 (Nev. 1957). “Because of unusual developments in the probate proceedings, the interests of the minor quite clearly demand attention and a determination of her rights under present circumstances should be had. Yet it is apparent that the court below properly refused to accept the appellant as…”
Ross v. Est. of Wells, 579 P.2d 782 (Nev. 1978). · cites it 2× “2d 300 (1951); NRS 136.200. 2 Indeed, Ross did not petition for a court award of fees for his representation of Weslee.”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 136.200(1): 1 case
Ross v. Est. of Wells, 579 P.2d 782 (Nev. 1978). “2d 300 (1951); NRS 136.200. 2 Indeed, Ross did not petition for a court award of fees for his representation of Weslee.”
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.