Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010 (2026)

Award of attorney’s fees

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 18.010 Award of attorney’s fees.

1. The compensation of an attorney and counselor for his or her services is governed by agreement, express or implied, which is not restrained by law.

2. In addition to the cases where an allowance is authorized by specific statute, the court may make an allowance of attorney’s fees to a prevailing party:

(a) When the prevailing party has not recovered more than $20,000; or

(b) Without regard to the recovery sought, when the court finds that the claim, counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint or defense of the opposing party was brought or maintained without reasonable ground or to harass the prevailing party. The court shall liberally construe the provisions of this paragraph in favor of awarding attorney’s fees in all appropriate situations. It is the intent of the Legislature that the court award attorney’s fees pursuant to this paragraph and impose sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure in all appropriate situations to punish for and deter frivolous or vexatious claims and defenses because such claims and defenses overburden limited judicial resources, hinder the timely resolution of meritorious claims and increase the costs of engaging in business and providing professional services to the public.

3. In awarding attorney’s fees, the court may pronounce its decision on the fees at the conclusion of the trial or special proceeding without written motion and with or without presentation of additional evidence.

4. Subsections 2 and 3 do not apply to any action arising out of a written instrument or agreement which entitles the prevailing party to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees.

[1911 CPA § 434; A 1951, 59]—(NRS A 1957, 129; 1967, 1254; 1969, 435, 667; 1971, 165, 802; 1975, 309; 1977, 774; 1985, 327; 1999, 903; 2003, 3478)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 411 cases (78 in the last 5 years), 1957–2025 · leading case: Smith v. Crown Fin. Serv. Of Am., 890 P.2d 769 (Nev. 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Smith v. Crown Fin. Serv. Of Am., 890 P.2d 769 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 72× “However, the district court found that *280 respondents were entitled to $20,000 for attorney fees and costs pursuant to NRS 18.010. Both parties appeal this award.”

Thomas v. City of North Las Vegas, 127 P.3d 1057 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 24× “NRS 18.010(2) (a) Thomas and Armstrong also urge us to reexamine the conditions precedent for recovery of attorney fees under NRS 18.”

Bobby Berosini, Ltd. v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, 971 P.2d 383 (Nev. 1998). · cites it 22× “PETA contends that NRAP 38, which limits attorney’s fees on appeal to frivolous appeals, does not limit the applicability or scope of NRS 18.010. Accordingly, PETA asserts that it is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees for its appeal of Berosini’s trial judgment pursuant to…”

Trs. of the Plumbers & Pipefitters Union Local 525 Health & Welfare Trust Plan v. Developers Sur. & Indem. Co., 84 P.3d 59 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 40× “115, NRCP 68 and NRS 18.010 do not apply to surety bond disputes.”

Rivero v. Rivero, 216 P.3d 213 (Nev. 2009). · cites it 12× “230, which prohibits punishment for contempt if a party alleges that a judge should be disqualified, prohibits an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.010 and sanctions under EDCR 7.60 and NRCP 11.”

54 Carolina Cherry Drive v. Anderson (In re 12067 Oakland Hills), 435 P.3d 672 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 32× “Anderson thereafter filed a motion seeking an award of attorney fees against LVMPD pursuant to NRS 18.010(2). In her motion, Anderson contended that she was a "prevailing party" entitled to fees under NRS 18.”

Roe v. Roe, 535 P.3d 274 (Nev. 2023). · cites it 20× “Further, we direct district courts to retain their substantive decision-making authority over custodial modifications and parenting time allocations, as well as reiterate that, in family law cases, being a prevailing party alone is not a sufficient basis for an award of attorney…”

N. Nev. Homes, LLC v. GL Constr., Inc., 422 P.3d 1234 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 19× “NNH opposed, arguing in part that GL was not the prevailing party under NRS 18.010 and 18.020 because NNH obtained a net recovery from the settlement.”

Valley Elec. Ass'n v. Overfield, 106 P.3d 1198 (Nev. 2005). · cites it 10× “: This case presents an issue of first impression for Nevada, whether district courts in eminent domain actions may award landowners attorney fees under NRS 18.010. We conclude that fees are available under the statute.”

Baldonado v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 194 P.3d 96 (Nev. 2008). · cites it 8× “Thereafter, the court denied the casino’s motion for attorney fees under NRS 18.010(2)(b) (frivolous claims). Appellants have appealed from the district court’s written decision ruling in the casino’s favor, and the casino has appealed from the order denying it attorney fees.”

Kahn v. Morse & Mowbray, 117 P.3d 227 (Nev. 2005). · cites it 8× “The district court granted the motion for summary judgment and later issued an order granting attorney fees to Byrd and Morse & Mowbray under NRS 18.010(2)(b), finding that the malpractice action was brought without reasonable grounds.”

Singer v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 890 P.2d 1305 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 38× “Relying on NRS 18.010, appellants next contend that because there were reasonable grounds for their claim, the district court abused its discretion in granting attorney's fees to Chase Manhattan.”

Show all 411 citing cases →

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(1) — 21 cases

Bates v. Chronister, 691 P.2d 865 (Nev. 1984).

Fry v. Dinan (In Re Dinan), 448 B.R. 775 (9th Cir. BAP 2011).

Semenza v. Caughlin Crafted Homes, 901 P.2d 684 (Nev. 1995).

Key Bank of Alaska v. Donnels, 787 P.2d 382 (Nev. 1990).

First Com. Title, Inc. v. Holmes, 550 P.2d 1271 (Nev. 1976).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(2) — 67 cases

145 East Harmon II Tr. Vs. the Residences at Mgm Grand-tower a Owners' Ass'n, 2020 NV 14 (Nev. 2020).

Mei-Gsr Holdings, LLC v. Peppermill Casinos, Inc., 416 P.3d 249 (Nev. 2018).

Thomas v. City of North Las Vegas, 127 P.3d 1057 (Nev. 2006). “NRS 18.010(2) (a) Thomas and Armstrong also urge us to reexamine the conditions precedent for recovery of attorney fees under NRS 18.”

Smith v. Crown Fin. Serv. Of Am., 890 P.2d 769 (Nev. 1995). “However, the district court found that *280 respondents were entitled to $20,000 for attorney fees and costs pursuant to NRS 18.010. Both parties appeal this award.”

Frantz v. Johnson, 999 P.2d 351 (Nev. 2000).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(2)(a) — 56 cases

54 Carolina Cherry Drive v. Anderson (In re 12067 Oakland Hills), 435 P.3d 672 (Nev. 2018). “Anderson thereafter filed a motion seeking an award of attorney fees against LVMPD pursuant to NRS 18.010(2). In her motion, Anderson contended that she was a "prevailing party" entitled to fees under NRS 18.”

N. Nev. Homes, LLC v. GL Constr., Inc., 422 P.3d 1234 (Nev. 2018). “NNH opposed, arguing in part that GL was not the prevailing party under NRS 18.010 and 18.020 because NNH obtained a net recovery from the settlement.”

Trs. of the Plumbers & Pipefitters Union Local 525 Health & Welfare Trust Plan v. Developers Sur. & Indem. Co., 84 P.3d 59 (Nev. 2004). “115, NRCP 68 and NRS 18.010 do not apply to surety bond disputes.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(2)(b) — 211 cases

Rivero v. Rivero, 216 P.3d 213 (Nev. 2009). “230, which prohibits punishment for contempt if a party alleges that a judge should be disqualified, prohibits an award of attorney fees under NRS 18.010 and sanctions under EDCR 7.60 and NRCP 11.”

Bobby Berosini, Ltd. v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, 971 P.2d 383 (Nev. 1998). “PETA contends that NRAP 38, which limits attorney’s fees on appeal to frivolous appeals, does not limit the applicability or scope of NRS 18.010. Accordingly, PETA asserts that it is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees for its appeal of Berosini’s trial judgment pursuant to…”

Baldonado v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 194 P.3d 96 (Nev. 2008). “Thereafter, the court denied the casino’s motion for attorney fees under NRS 18.010(2)(b) (frivolous claims). Appellants have appealed from the district court’s written decision ruling in the casino’s favor, and the casino has appealed from the order denying it attorney fees.”

Kahn v. Morse & Mowbray, 117 P.3d 227 (Nev. 2005). “The district court granted the motion for summary judgment and later issued an order granting attorney fees to Byrd and Morse & Mowbray under NRS 18.010(2)(b), finding that the malpractice action was brought without reasonable grounds.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(2)(c) — 8 cases

Campbell v. Nocilla, 692 P.2d 491 (Nev. 1985).

Int'l Indus., Inc. v. United Mortg. Co., 606 P.2d 163 (Nev. 1980).

Trs. of the Carpenters for S. Nevada Health & Welfare Trust v. Better Bldg. Co., 710 P.2d 1379 (Nev. 1985).

Mays v. Todaro, 626 P.2d 260 (Nev. 1981).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(3) — 16 cases

O'Connell v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 429 P.3d 664 (Nev. 2018).

Cnty. of Clark v. Blanchard Constr. Co., 653 P.2d 1217 (Nev. 1982).

Armstrong v. Riggi, 549 P.2d 753 (Nev. 1976).

Singer v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 890 P.2d 1305 (Nev. 1995). “Relying on NRS 18.010, appellants next contend that because there were reasonable grounds for their claim, the district court abused its discretion in granting attorney's fees to Chase Manhattan.”

Works v. Kuhn, 732 P.2d 1373 (Nev. 1987).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(3)(a) — 8 cases

Mays v. Todaro, 626 P.2d 260 (Nev. 1981).

Int'l Indus., Inc. v. United Mortg. Co., 606 P.2d 163 (Nev. 1980).

City of Las Vegas v. Cragin Indus., Inc., 478 P.2d 585 (Nev. 1970).

Weaks v. Mounter, 493 P.2d 1307 (Nev. 1972).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(4) — 5 cases

In Re USA Com. Mortg. Co., 802 F. Supp. 2d 1147 (D. Nev. 2011).

McCrary v. Bianco, 131 P.3d 573 (Nev. 2006).

Dobron v. Bunch, 215 P.3d 35 (Nev. 2009).

3685 San Fernando Lenders, LLC v. Compass USA SPE LLC, 802 F. Supp. 2d 1147 (D. Nev. 2011).

In Re: Antonia Andrade-garcia (9th Cir. BAP 2022).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(5) — 3 cases

Trs. of the Carpenters for S. Nevada Health & Welfare Trust v. Better Bldg. Co., 710 P.2d 1379 (Nev. 1985).

Sanchez v. Alonso, 615 P.2d 934 (Nev. 1980).

Mgm Desert Inn, Inc. v. Shack, 809 F. Supp. 783 (D. Nev. 1993).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(a) — 2 cases

Sell v. Diehl C/W 74916 (Nev. 2018).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(b) — 4 cases

Sell v. Diehl C/W 74916 (Nev. 2018).

Tmm, Inc. v. Dimension, Inc. C/W 72779 (Nev. 2018).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 18.010(l)(a) — 2 cases

Parodi v. Budetti, 984 P.2d 172 (Nev. 1999).

Henry Prods. Inc. v. Tarmu, 967 P.2d 444 (Nev. 1998).

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.