NRS
164.010 Petition for assumption of jurisdiction; circumstances in which
jurisdiction is proper in this State; determination of venue; powers of court;
petition for removal of trust from jurisdiction of court.
1. Upon petition of any person appointed
as trustee of an express trust by any written instrument other than a will, or
upon petition of a settlor or beneficiary of the trust, the district court
shall assume jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem unless another
court has properly assumed continuing jurisdiction in rem in accordance with
the laws of that jurisdiction and the district court determines that it is not
appropriate for the district court to assume jurisdiction under the
circumstances.
2. For the purposes of this section,
jurisdiction is proper in this State if:
(a) The trust instrument expressly provides that:
(1) The situs of the trust is in this
State or a county located in this State; or
(2) A court in this State has jurisdiction
over the trust;
(b) A person has designated for the trust that
this State or a county located in this State is the situs or has jurisdiction,
if such person made the designation at a time during which he or she held the
power to make such a designation under the express terms of the trust
instrument;
(c) The trust owns an interest in real property
located in this State;
(d) The trust owns personal property, wherever
situated, if the trustee is:
(1) Incorporated or authorized to do
business in this State;
(2) A trust company licensed under chapter 669 of NRS;
(3) A family trust company, as defined in NRS 669A.080; or
(4) A national association having an
office in this State;
(e) Any trustee resides or conducts business in
this State; or
(f) At least part of the administration of the
trust occurs in this State.
3. Notwithstanding the provisions of this
section, if a court of a jurisdiction other than this State has jurisdiction
over a trust and grants an order authorizing a transfer of jurisdiction over
that trust to this State, the district court has the power to assume
jurisdiction over the trust and to otherwise supervise the administration of
that trust in accordance with the procedures set forth in this title.
4. For the purposes of determining venue
within this State, preference is given in the following order:
(a) To the county in which venue was most
recently declared by a person granted the power to make such a declaration
under the terms of the trust instrument at the time of the filing of the
petition;
(b) To the county in which venue is declared in
the trust instrument;
(c) To the county in which the situs or domicile
is declared by the trustee at the time of the filing of the petition in a
certification of the trust which complies with subsection 2 of NRS 164.400 and subsection 2 of NRS 164.410 and which contains a declaration
of the trust’s situs or domicile as authorized in subsection 1 of NRS 164.410;
(d) To a county in which any trustee resides or
conducts business at the time of the filing of the petition;
(e) To a county in which any real property
interest owned by the trust is located; and
(f) To a county in which any beneficiary of the
trust resides.
5. When the court assumes jurisdiction
pursuant to this section, the court:
(a) Has jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding
in rem as of the date of the filing of the petition;
(b) Shall be deemed to have personal jurisdiction
over any trustee confirmed by the court and any person appearing in the matter,
unless such an appearance is made solely for the purpose of objecting to the
jurisdiction of the court;
(c) May confirm at the same time the appointment
of the trustee and specify the manner in which the trustee must qualify; and
(d) May consider at the same time granting orders
on other matters relating to the trust, including, without limitation, matters
that might be addressed in a declaratory judgment relating to the trust under
subsection 2 of NRS 30.040 or petitions
filed pursuant to NRS 153.031 or 164.015 whether such matters are raised in
the petition to assume jurisdiction pursuant to this section or in one or more
separate petitions that are filed concurrently with the petition to assume
jurisdiction.
6. At any time, a trustee may petition the
court for removal of the trust from continuing jurisdiction of the court.
7. As used in this section, “written
instrument” includes, without limitation, an electronic trust as defined in NRS 163.0015.
[1:22:1953]—(NRS A 1961,
400; 1999,
2377; 2001,
2352; 2015,
3551; 2017,
1695; 2023,
1323)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
19
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case:
In re Tr. of Burgauer, 2022 NV 79 (Nev. 2022).
In re Tr. of Burgauer, 2022 NV 79 (Nev. 2022).
· cites it 8× “Margaret argued that the district court had jurisdiction over the marital trust under NRS 164.010, which provides that a district court has in rem jurisdiction over a trust domiciled in Nevada and that a trust is domiciled in Nevada "notwithstanding that the trustee neither…”
In re the Michael Aboud & Betty Jo Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 314 P.3d 941 (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 7× “We must now determine whether the in rem jurisdiction over trust assets conferred upon a district court by NRS 164.010(1) and NRS 164.015(6) permits that court to impose a constructive trust on this previous trust property based on the alleged improper transfer made by the…”
In Re: Sommer Fam. Living Tr. (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 23× “1 Because we cannot conclude that the district court exercised its discretion under NRS 164.010 with due regard to the applicable statutory standards, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
In Re: Goldstein Irrevocable Trust, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41 (Nev. 2025).
· cites it 14× “Appellant argues that personal jurisdiction was not required because the statutory requirements for in rem jurisdiction under NRS 164.010 were satisfied and thus the court had jurisdiction to construe the trust instrument.”
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020).
· cites it 12× “Following the assumption of jurisdiction over the trust under NRS 164.010, the district court must hold an evidentiary hearing and make factual findings when an interested person challenges a settlor's or trustees fitness in accordance with NRS 164.”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020).
· cites it 6× “” NRS § 164.010(1). Consequently, the 5 court “[h]as jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem as of the date of the filing of the 6 petition.”
In re Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 2013 NV 97 (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 7× “We must now determine whether the in rem jurisdiction over trust assets conferred upon a district court by NRS 164.010(1) and NRS 164.015(6) permits that court to impose a constructive trust on this previous trust property based on the alleged improper transfer made by the…”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020).
· cites it 4× “” NRS § 164.010(1). Consequently, the 7 court “[h]as jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem as of the date of the filing of the 8 petition.”
Davis Vs. Dist. Ct. (davis) c/w 68542, 2017 NV 26 (Nev. 2017).
· cites it 2× “The amended order assumed jurisdiction over the FHT under NRS 164.010, found that the court had personal jurisdiction over Christopher as ITA and as the manager of FHT Holdings, and confirmed DTC's appointment as trustee and Christopher's appointment as ITA.”
Davis Vs. Dist. Ct. (davis) c/w 68542, 2017 NV 26 (Nev. 2017).
· cites it 2× “The amended order assumed jurisdiction over the FHT under NRS 164.010, found that the court had personal jurisdiction over Christopher as ITA and as the manager of FHT Holdings, and confirmed DTC's appointment as trustee and Christopher's appointment as ITA.”
Davis Vs. Dist. Ct. (davis) c/w 68542, 2017 NV 4 (Nev. 2017).
· cites it 2× “The amended order assumed jurisdiction over the FHT under NRS 164.010, found that the court had personal jurisdiction over Christopher as ITA and as the manager of FHT Holdings, and confirmed DTC's appointment as trustee and Christopher's 2Despite the lapse in time between…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(1) — 7 cases
In re the Michael Aboud & Betty Jo Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 314 P.3d 941 (Nev. 2013).
“We must now determine whether the in rem jurisdiction over trust assets conferred upon a district court by NRS 164.010(1) and NRS 164.015(6) permits that court to impose a constructive trust on this previous trust property based on the alleged improper transfer made by the…”
In re Tr. of Burgauer, 2022 NV 79 (Nev. 2022).
“Margaret argued that the district court had jurisdiction over the marital trust under NRS 164.010, which provides that a district court has in rem jurisdiction over a trust domiciled in Nevada and that a trust is domiciled in Nevada "notwithstanding that the trustee neither…”
In Re: Sommer Fam. Living Tr. (Nev. 2019).
“1 Because we cannot conclude that the district court exercised its discretion under NRS 164.010 with due regard to the applicable statutory standards, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
In re Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 2013 NV 97 (Nev. 2013).
“We must now determine whether the in rem jurisdiction over trust assets conferred upon a district court by NRS 164.010(1) and NRS 164.015(6) permits that court to impose a constructive trust on this previous trust property based on the alleged improper transfer made by the…”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020).
“” NRS § 164.010(1). Consequently, the 5 court “[h]as jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem as of the date of the filing of the 6 petition.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(2) — 1 case
In Re: Sommer Fam. Living Tr. (Nev. 2019).
“1 Because we cannot conclude that the district court exercised its discretion under NRS 164.010 with due regard to the applicable statutory standards, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(2)(e) — 1 case
In re Tr. of Burgauer, 2022 NV 79 (Nev. 2022).
“Margaret argued that the district court had jurisdiction over the marital trust under NRS 164.010, which provides that a district court has in rem jurisdiction over a trust domiciled in Nevada and that a trust is domiciled in Nevada "notwithstanding that the trustee neither…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(4) — 1 case
In Re: Sommer Fam. Living Tr. (Nev. 2019).
“1 Because we cannot conclude that the district court exercised its discretion under NRS 164.010 with due regard to the applicable statutory standards, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(4)(a) — 1 case
In Re: Sommer Fam. Living Tr. (Nev. 2019).
“1 Because we cannot conclude that the district court exercised its discretion under NRS 164.010 with due regard to the applicable statutory standards, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this order.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(5) — 2 cases
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020).
“Following the assumption of jurisdiction over the trust under NRS 164.010, the district court must hold an evidentiary hearing and make factual findings when an interested person challenges a settlor's or trustees fitness in accordance with NRS 164.”
In Re: Goldstein Irrevocable Trust, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41 (Nev. 2025).
“Appellant argues that personal jurisdiction was not required because the statutory requirements for in rem jurisdiction under NRS 164.010 were satisfied and thus the court had jurisdiction to construe the trust instrument.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(5)(a) — 3 cases
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020).
“” NRS § 164.010(1). Consequently, the 5 court “[h]as jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem as of the date of the filing of the 6 petition.”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020).
“” NRS § 164.010(1). Consequently, the 7 court “[h]as jurisdiction of the trust as a proceeding in rem as of the date of the filing of the 8 petition.”
In Re: Goldstein Irrevocable Trust, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41 (Nev. 2025).
“Appellant argues that personal jurisdiction was not required because the statutory requirements for in rem jurisdiction under NRS 164.010 were satisfied and thus the court had jurisdiction to construe the trust instrument.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.010(5)(b) — 2 cases
In re Tr. of Burgauer, 2022 NV 79 (Nev. 2022).
“Margaret argued that the district court had jurisdiction over the marital trust under NRS 164.010, which provides that a district court has in rem jurisdiction over a trust domiciled in Nevada and that a trust is domiciled in Nevada "notwithstanding that the trustee neither…”
In Re: Goldstein Irrevocable Trust, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 41 (Nev. 2025).
“Appellant argues that personal jurisdiction was not required because the statutory requirements for in rem jurisdiction under NRS 164.010 were satisfied and thus the court had jurisdiction to construe the trust instrument.”
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.