Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.015 (2026)

Petition concerning internal affairs of nontestamentary trust; jurisdiction of court; procedure for contests of certain trusts; final order; appeal

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 164.015  Petition concerning internal affairs of nontestamentary trust; jurisdiction of court; procedure for contests of certain trusts; final order; appeal.

      1.  The court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust, including a revocable living trust while the settlor is still living if the court determines that the settlor cannot adequately protect his or her own interests or if the interested person shows that the settlor is incompetent or susceptible to undue influence. Proceedings which may be maintained under this section are those concerning the administration and distribution of trusts, the declaration of rights and the determination of other matters involving trustees and beneficiaries of trusts, including petitions with respect to a nontestamentary trust for any appropriate relief provided with respect to a testamentary trust in NRS 153.031 and petitions for a ruling that property not formally titled in the name of a trust or its trustee constitutes trust property pursuant to NRS 163.002.

      2.  A petition under this section or subsection 2 of NRS 30.040 that relates to a trust may be filed in conjunction with a petition under NRS 164.010 or at any time after the court has assumed jurisdiction under that section.

      3.  If an interested person contests the validity of a revocable nontestamentary trust, the interested person is the plaintiff and the trustee is the defendant. The written grounds for contesting the validity of the trust constitutes a pleading and must conform with any rules applicable to pleadings in a civil action. This subsection applies whether the person contesting the validity of the trust is the petitioner or the objector and whether or not the opposition to the validity of the trust is asserted under this section or subsection 2 of NRS 30.040.

      4.  In a proceeding pursuant to subsection 3, the competency of the settlor to make the trust, the freedom of the settlor from duress, menace, fraud or undue influence at the time of execution of the will, the execution and attestation of the trust instrument, or any other question affecting the validity of the trust is a question of fact and must be tried by the court, subject to the provisions of subsection 5.

      5.  A court may consolidate the cases if there is a contest of a revocable nontestamentary trust and a contest relating to a will executed on the same date. If a jury is demanded pursuant to NRS 137.020 for the contest of the will, the court may instruct the jury to render an advisory opinion with respect to an issue of fact pursuant to subsection 4 in the contest of the trust.

      6.  Upon the hearing, the court shall enter such order as it deems appropriate. The order is final and conclusive as to all matters determined and is binding in rem upon the trust estate and upon the interests of all beneficiaries, vested or contingent, except that appeal to the appellate court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the rules fixed by the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 4 of Article 6 of the Nevada Constitution may be taken from the order within 30 days after notice of its entry by filing notice of appeal with the clerk of the district court. The appellant shall mail a copy of the notice to each person who has appeared of record. If the proceeding was brought pursuant to subsection 3, 4 or 5, the court must also award costs pursuant to chapter 18 of NRS.

      7.  Except as otherwise ordered by the court, a proceeding under this section does not result in continuing supervisory proceedings, and the administration of the trust must proceed expeditiously in a manner consistent with the terms of the trust, without judicial intervention or the order, approval or other action of any court, unless the jurisdiction of the court is invoked by an interested person or exercised as provided by other law.

      8.  As used in this section, “nontestamentary trust” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 163.0016.

      (Added to NRS by 1999, 2375; A 2009, 798; 2013, 1749; 2015, 3552)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 2006–2020 · leading case: In re the Michael Aboud & Betty Jo Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 314 P.3d 941 (Nev. 2013).
In re the Michael Aboud & Betty Jo Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 314 P.3d 941 (Nev. 2013). · cites it 7× “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 partnership to the third party.”
Linthicum v. Rudi, 148 P.3d 746 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 3× “Specifically, Ernette and Myrna argue that NRS 164.015, NRS 153.031(l)(a) and NRS 153.”
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 26× “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 164.015 and issue an order binding in rem on the trust and appealable to this court.”
In Re: Lindblade Fam. Trust (Nev. 2020). · cites it 5× “Rather, we conclude that NRS 164.015, when read as a whole, requires a petitioner to comply with all controlling procedural rules before he or she is entitled to a trial.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 4× “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
In re Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 2013 NV 97 (Nev. 2013). · cites it 6× “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 partnership to the third party.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 2× “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 2× “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “” NRS § 164.015(1). 8 Plaintiff filed his petition in Nevada state court.”
Delman v. Delman (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “” NRS § 164.015(1). 10 Plaintiff filed his petition in Nevada state court.”
Marigomen v. Dist. Ct. (Ichiyasu) (Nev. 2014). “NRS 164.015(6) allows an appeal from a district court order resolving a petition over the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
In Re: Hillygus Fam. Trust (Nev. 2015). “See NRAP 4(a)(1); NRS 164.015(6); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.015(1) — 7 cases
Linthicum v. Rudi, 148 P.3d 746 (Nev. 2006). “Specifically, Ernette and Myrna argue that NRS 164.015, NRS 153.031(l)(a) and NRS 153.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020). “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 164.015 and issue an order binding in rem on the trust and appealable to this court.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
Klabacka Vs. Nelson c/w 66772, 2017 NV 24 (Nev. 2017). “Additionally, under NRS 164.015(1), "Mlle court has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings initiated by the petition of an interested person concerning the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.015(3) — 1 case
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020). “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 164.015 and issue an order binding in rem on the trust and appealable to this court.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.015(4) — 2 cases
In Re: Lindblade Fam. Trust (Nev. 2020). “Rather, we conclude that NRS 164.015, when read as a whole, requires a petitioner to comply with all controlling procedural rules before he or she is entitled to a trial.”
In Re: Frasier Fam. Trust, 2020 NV 56 (Nev. 2020). “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 164.015 and issue an order binding in rem on the trust and appealable to this court.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 164.015(6) — 4 cases
In re the Michael Aboud & Betty Jo Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 314 P.3d 941 (Nev. 2013). “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 partnership to the third party.”
In re Aboud Inter Vivos Trust, 2013 NV 97 (Nev. 2013). “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 partnership to the third party.”
Marigomen v. Dist. Ct. (Ichiyasu) (Nev. 2014). “NRS 164.015(6) allows an appeal from a district court order resolving a petition over the internal affairs of a nontestamentary trust.”
In Re: Hillygus Fam. Trust (Nev. 2015). “See NRAP 4(a)(1); NRS 164.015(6); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev.”
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.