Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 22.110 (2026)

Imprisonment until performance if contempt is omission to perform an act; penalty for failure or refusal to testify before grand jury

✓ current as of July 2026

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

NRS 22.110 Imprisonment until performance if contempt is omission to perform an act; penalty for failure or refusal to testify before grand jury.

1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, when the contempt consists in the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, the person may be imprisoned until the person performs it. The required act must be specified in the warrant of commitment.

2. A person so imprisoned as a result of his or her failure or refusal to testify before a grand jury may be imprisoned in the county jail for a period not to exceed 6 months or until that grand jury is discharged, whichever is less.

[1911 CPA § 462; RL § 5404; NCL § 8951]—(NRS A 1985, 1033)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1967–2018 · leading case: Hildahl v. Hildahl, 601 P.2d 58 (Nev. 1979).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hildahl v. Hildahl, 601 P.2d 58 (Nev. 1979). “” NRS 22.110. Although in the instant case, the district court sentenced appellant to a specific jail term, the fact that the sentence was suspended on the condition that Roger pay the arrearages indicates that the contempt was designed to coerce his performance, and was…”

Kellar v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 470 P.2d 434 (Nev. 1970). “and evidence taken, the court or judge or jury, as the case may be, shall determine whether the person proceeded against its guilty of the contempt charged; and if it be found that he is guilty of the contempt, a fine may be imposed on him not exceeding $500, or he may be…”

Lamb v. Lamb, 433 P.2d 265 (Nev. 1967). ““When the contempt consists in the omission to perform an act which is yet in the power of the person to perform, he may be imprisoned until he shall have performed it, and in that case the act shall be specified in the warrant of commitment.”

Foley v. Foley (Nev. 2018). “; see also NRS 22.110. However, "consistent with due process, a party cannot be found guilty of failing to pay child support and sentenced to jail conditional upon his payment of arrearages unless the trial court first determines that the individual (1) has the ability to make…”

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.