Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.131

Transmittal of record of proceedings to reviewing court by party and agency; shortening of or corrections or additions to record; additional evidence; modification of findings and decision by agency based on additional evidence

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 233B.131  Transmittal of record of proceedings to reviewing court by party and agency; shortening of or corrections or additions to record; additional evidence; modification of findings and decision by agency based on additional evidence.

      1.  Within 45 days after the service of the petition for judicial review or such time as is allowed by the court:

      (a) The party who filed the petition for judicial review shall transmit to the reviewing court an original or certified copy of the transcript of the evidence resulting in the final decision of the agency.

      (b) The agency that rendered the decision which is the subject of the petition shall transmit to the reviewing court the original or a certified copy of the remainder of the record of the proceeding under review.

Ê The record may be shortened by stipulation of the parties to the proceedings. A party unreasonably refusing to stipulate to limit the record, as determined by the court, may be assessed by the court any additional costs. The court may require or permit subsequent corrections or additions to the record.

      2.  If, before submission to the court, an application is made to the court for leave to present additional evidence, and it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that the additional evidence is material and that there were good reasons for failure to present it in the proceeding before the agency, the court may order that the additional evidence and any rebuttal evidence be taken before the agency upon such conditions as the court determines.

      3.  After receipt of any additional evidence, the agency:

      (a) May modify its findings and decision; and

      (b) Shall file the evidence and any modifications, new findings or decisions with the reviewing court.

      (Added to NRS by 1989, 1649; A 2015, 710)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2009–2022 · leading case: Garcia v. Scolari's Food & Drug
Garcia v. Scolari's Food & Drug (2009) nev · cites it 10× “Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that good reasons did not exist under NRS 233B.131(2) to remand this matter to the appeals officer for consideration of additional evidence.”
Lau v. City Of Las Vegas (2022) nev · cites it 2× “" (emphasis added)); NRS 233B.131(3)(a) (permitting an agency to modify its findings and decision "[a]fter receipt of any additional evidence); City of North Pole v.”
Lau v. City Of Las Vegas (2022) nev “123 (providing that in regards to a hearing subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, "[p]arties must be notified either before or during the hearing . . . of the material noticed, .”
Morgan v. Mgm grand/mgm Resorts Int'l. (2014) nev “135(1) (limiting judicial review to the administrative record); NRS 233B.131(2) (explaining the process to have additional evidence considered).”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.131(2) — 2 cases
Garcia v. Scolari's Food & Drug (2009) nev “Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that good reasons did not exist under NRS 233B.131(2) to remand this matter to the appeals officer for consideration of additional evidence.”
Morgan v. Mgm grand/mgm Resorts Int'l. (2014) nev “135(1) (limiting judicial review to the administrative record); NRS 233B.131(2) (explaining the process to have additional evidence considered).”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.131(3)(a) — 2 cases
Lau v. City Of Las Vegas (2022) nev “" (emphasis added)); NRS 233B.131(3)(a) (permitting an agency to modify its findings and decision "[a]fter receipt of any additional evidence); City of North Pole v.”
Lau v. City Of Las Vegas (2022) nev “123 (providing that in regards to a hearing subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, "[p]arties must be notified either before or during the hearing . . . of the material noticed, .”
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.