Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 233B - NEVADA ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135 (2026)

Judicial review: Manner of conducting; burden of proof; standard for review

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 233B.135  Judicial review: Manner of conducting; burden of proof; standard for review.

      1.  Judicial review of a final decision of an agency must be:

      (a) Conducted by the court without a jury; and

      (b) Confined to the record.

Ê In cases concerning alleged irregularities in procedure before an agency that are not shown in the record, the court may receive evidence concerning the irregularities.

      2.  The final decision of the agency shall be deemed reasonable and lawful until reversed or set aside in whole or in part by the court. The burden of proof is on the party attacking or resisting the decision to show that the final decision is invalid pursuant to subsection 3.

      3.  The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of evidence on a question of fact. The court may remand or affirm the final decision or set it aside in whole or in part if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the final decision of the agency is:

      (a) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;

      (b) In excess of the statutory authority of the agency;

      (c) Made upon unlawful procedure;

      (d) Affected by other error of law;

      (e) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record; or

      (f) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion.

      4.  As used in this section, “substantial evidence” means evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.

      (Added to NRS by 1989, 1650; A 2015, 710)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 156 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case: Gen. Motors v. Jackson, 900 P.2d 345 (Nev. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gen. Motors v. Jackson, 900 P.2d 345 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 7× “Appellant first asserts that the legislature specifically restricted the district court’s authority to remand cases to the appeals officer for further fact-finding by amending NRS 233B.140. We disagree.”
O'Keefe v. State, 431 P.3d 350 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 5× “135(3)(a), and "[a]ffected by other error of law," NRS 233B.135(3)(d). The hearing officer was incorrect, as a matter of law, when she determined that O'Keefe's offenses required progressive discipline because they were not serious violations of law or regulations.”
Clements v. Airport Auth. of Washoe Cnty., 896 P.2d 458 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 8× “2d 355, 357 (1983); see NRS 233B.135 [1] ; *461 State Envtl. Comm'n v.”
Gilman v. Nevada State Bd. of Veterinary Med. Examiners, 89 P.3d 1000 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 3× “Gilman next alleges that the district court erred by applying the substantial evidence standard under NRS 233B.135 to find Dr. Gilman guilty of the charges based on substantial evidence in the record.”
Home Warranty Adm'r of Nev., Inc. Vs. State, Dep't of Bus. & Indus., 2021 NV 5 (Nev. 2021). · cites it 10× “Mil violation of constitutional or statutory provisions," NRS 233B.135(3)(a), "fa] ffected by . . .”
Whitehead v. Nevada Comm'n on Jud. Discipline, 878 P.2d 913 (Nev. 1994). · cites it 4× “See NRS 233B.135. [1] Additionally, there is no dispute that the Commission has broad power to discipline judges and that its orders are final unless appealed to this court.”
Horne v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 936 P.2d 839 (Nev. 1997). · cites it 7× “130 and based on all the grounds enumerated in NRS 233B.135(3). [3] Specifically, SIIS argued that the record did not supply substantial evidence that Horne had PVCD or that this condition was causally connected to the January 5, 1991 industrial injury; therefore, the appeals…”
United Exposition Serv. Co. v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 851 P.2d 423 (Nev. 1993). · cites it 3× “This standard of review is codified in NRS 233B.135. 1 It is well recognized that this court, in reviewing an administrative agency decision, will not substitute its judgment of the evidence for that of the administrative agency.”
Minton v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 881 P.2d 1339 (Nev. 1994). · cites it 4× “Minton claims that the Board’s factual findings are clearly erroneous and its conclusions that he violated the Physicians and Assistants chapter unsupported by clear and convincing evidence.”
Schepcoff v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 849 P.2d 271 (Nev. 1993). · cites it 4× “NRS 233B.135. This court may reverse the decision of an administrative agency if the substantial rights of the appellant have been prejudiced because the final decision of the agency contains, inter alia, legal error, or is characterized by an abuse of discretion.”
State Ex Rel. Bd. of Equalization v. Barta, 188 P.3d 1092 (Nev. 2008). · cites it 3× “420(5); NRS 233B.135(1). [16] Imperial Palace v. State, Dep't Taxation, 108 Nev.”
Dubray v. Coeur Rochester, Inc., 913 P.2d 1289 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 5× “See NRS 233B.135. In the present case, because the appeals officer's decision was supported by substantial evidence, we conclude that the district court's order denying Dubray's petition for judicial review must be upheld.”
Show all 156 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(1) — 12 cases
State Ex Rel. Bd. of Equalization v. Barta, 188 P.3d 1092 (Nev. 2008). “420(5); NRS 233B.135(1). [16] Imperial Palace v. State, Dep't Taxation, 108 Nev.”
State ex rel. State Bd. of Equalization v. Barta, 188 P.3d 1092 (Nev. 2008).
State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Khweiss, 825 P.2d 218 (Nev. 1992).
Clements v. Airport Auth. of Washoe Cnty., 896 P.2d 458 (Nev. 1995). “2d 355, 357 (1983); see NRS 233B.135 [1] ; *461 State Envtl. Comm'n v.”
Mishler v. State Bd. of Med. Examiners, 849 P.2d 291 (Nev. 1993).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(1)(b) — 6 cases
City of Las Vegas v. Evans, 301 P.3d 844 (Nev. 2013).
Mgm Mirage-City Ctr. v. Dorough (Nev. 2013).
Padilla Vs. Golden Nugget (Nev. 2020).
Highroller Transp. v. Nev. Transp. Auth. (Nev. 2023).
Villwock v. State of Nev. Dept. of Emp. Sec. Div. (Nev. 2013).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(2) — 6 cases
Weaver v. State, Dep't of Motor Vehs., 117 P.3d 193 (Nev. 2005).
Dutchess Bus. Servs. v. State, Bd. of Pharm., 184 P.3d 397 (Nev. 2008).
Bruen v. State, Dept. of Pub. Saf. (Nev. 2013).
Chief Admin. Officer of the Occupational Saf. & health Admin., Div. of Indus. Relations of the Dep't of Bus. & Indus., State of Nevada v. Savage Servs. Corp (D. Nev. 2019).
Reyes v. Civil Serv. Bd. of the Lv Metro. Police Dept. (Nev. 2014).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3) — 56 cases
O'Keefe v. State, 431 P.3d 350 (Nev. 2018). “135(3)(a), and "[a]ffected by other error of law," NRS 233B.135(3)(d). The hearing officer was incorrect, as a matter of law, when she determined that O'Keefe's offenses required progressive discipline because they were not serious violations of law or regulations.”
Horne v. State Indus. Ins. Sys., 936 P.2d 839 (Nev. 1997). “130 and based on all the grounds enumerated in NRS 233B.135(3). [3] Specifically, SIIS argued that the record did not supply substantial evidence that Horne had PVCD or that this condition was causally connected to the January 5, 1991 industrial injury; therefore, the appeals…”
City of Henderson v. Wolfgram, 2021 NV 79 (Nev. 2021).
Buma Vs. Providence Corp. Dev., 2019 NV 60 (Nev. 2019).
Diamond v. Swick, 28 P.3d 1087 (Nev. 2001).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3)(a) — 17 cases
Home Warranty Adm'r of Nev., Inc. Vs. State, Dep't of Bus. & Indus., 2021 NV 5 (Nev. 2021). “Mil violation of constitutional or statutory provisions," NRS 233B.135(3)(a), "fa] ffected by . . .”
O'Keefe v. State, 431 P.3d 350 (Nev. 2018). “135(3)(a), and "[a]ffected by other error of law," NRS 233B.135(3)(d). The hearing officer was incorrect, as a matter of law, when she determined that O'Keefe's offenses required progressive discipline because they were not serious violations of law or regulations.”
State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Campbell, 862 P.2d 1184 (Nev. 1993).
Day v. Washoe Cnty. Sch. Dist., 116 P.3d 68 (Nev. 2005).
State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Campbell, 844 P.2d 795 (Nev. 1992).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3)(c) — 1 case
Bivins Constr. v. State Contractors' Bd., 809 P.2d 1268 (Nev. 1991).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3)(d) — 17 cases
State, Dep't of Motor Vehs. & Pub. Saf. v. Lovett, 874 P.2d 1247 (Nev. 1994).
Home Warranty Adm'r of Nev., Inc. Vs. State, Dep't of Bus. & Indus., 2021 NV 5 (Nev. 2021). “Mil violation of constitutional or statutory provisions," NRS 233B.135(3)(a), "fa] ffected by . . .”
O'Keefe v. State, 431 P.3d 350 (Nev. 2018). “135(3)(a), and "[a]ffected by other error of law," NRS 233B.135(3)(d). The hearing officer was incorrect, as a matter of law, when she determined that O'Keefe's offenses required progressive discipline because they were not serious violations of law or regulations.”
Father & Sons & A Daughter Too v. Transp. Servs. Auth., 182 P.3d 100 (Nev. 2008).
Dep't of Corr. v. Ludwick, 440 P.3d 43 (Nev. 2019).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3)(e) — 35 cases
Law Offices of Barry Levinson, P.C. v. Milko, 184 P.3d 378 (Nev. 2008).
Gilman v. Nevada State Bd. of Veterinary Med. Examiners, 89 P.3d 1000 (Nev. 2004). “Gilman next alleges that the district court erred by applying the substantial evidence standard under NRS 233B.135 to find Dr. Gilman guilty of the charges based on substantial evidence in the record.”
State, Dep't of Taxation v. Masco Builder Cabinet Grp., 265 P.3d 666 (Nev. 2011).
City of North Las Vegas v. State, Local Gov't Emp.-Mgmt. Relations Bd., 261 P.3d 1071 (Nev. 2011).
Sec'y of State v. Tretiak, 22 P.3d 1134 (Nev. 2001).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(3)(f) — 18 cases
Dutchess Bus. Servs., Inc. v. Nevada State Bd. of Pharmacy, 191 P.3d 1159 (Nev. 2008).
Sec'y of State v. Tretiak, 22 P.3d 1134 (Nev. 2001).
Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada, 944 P.2d 835 (Nev. 1997).
Minton v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 881 P.2d 1339 (Nev. 1994). “Minton claims that the Board’s factual findings are clearly erroneous and its conclusions that he violated the Physicians and Assistants chapter unsupported by clear and convincing evidence.”
Dutchess Bus. Servs. v. State, Bd. of Pharm., 184 P.3d 397 (Nev. 2008).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(4) — 13 cases
Sierra Pac. Indus. v. Wilson, 440 P.3d 37 (Nev. 2019).
Sierra Pac. Indus. Vs. Wilson, P.E., 2019 NV 13 (Nev. 2019).
Goodwin v. Jones (Nev. 2016).
Goodwin v. Jones, 2016 NV 12 (Nev. 2016).
Sierra Pack'g v. Chief Ad. Off'r of NOSHA, 2017 NV 83 (Nev. 2017).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(d) — 1 case
Dep't of Motor Vehs. & Pub. Saf. v. Jones-West Ford, Inc., 962 P.2d 624 (Nev. 1998).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 233B.135(l)(b) — 3 cases
Minton v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 881 P.2d 1339 (Nev. 1994). “Minton claims that the Board’s factual findings are clearly erroneous and its conclusions that he violated the Physicians and Assistants chapter unsupported by clear and convincing evidence.”
City of North Las Vegas v. State, Local Gov't Emp.-Mgmt. Relations Bd., 261 P.3d 1071 (Nev. 2011).
Citizens for Honest & Responsible Gov't v. Heller, 11 P.3d 121 (Nev. 2000).
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.