Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 174.335 (2026)
Subpoena for production of documentary evidence and of objects
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 174.335 Subpoena for production of documentary evidence and of objects.
1. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 172.139, a subpoena may also command the person to whom it is directed to produce the books, papers, documents or other objects designated therein.
2. The court on motion made promptly may quash or modify the subpoena if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.
3. The court may direct that books, papers, documents or objects designated in the subpoena be produced before the court at a time before the trial or before the time when they are to be offered in evidence and may, upon their production, permit the books, papers, documents or objects or portions thereof to be inspected by the parties and their attorneys.
(Added to NRS by 1967, 1421; A 1985, 1030)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 1997–1997 · leading case: Jaeger v. State, 948 P.2d 1185 (Nev. 1997).
Jaeger v. State, 948 P.2d 1185 (Nev. 1997). “Jaeger issued the subpoena commanding Dan Luke to produce the Internal Affairs report pursuant to NRS 174.335(1) [1] . The district court may quash or modify the subpoena "if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 174.335(1) — 1 case
Jaeger v. State, 948 P.2d 1185 (Nev. 1997). “Jaeger issued the subpoena commanding Dan Luke to produce the Internal Affairs report pursuant to NRS 174.335(1) [1] . The district court may quash or modify the subpoena "if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 174.335(2) — 1 case
Jaeger v. State, 948 P.2d 1185 (Nev. 1997). “Jaeger issued the subpoena commanding Dan Luke to produce the Internal Affairs report pursuant to NRS 174.335(1) [1] . The district court may quash or modify the subpoena "if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.”
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.