Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 286.110 (2026)

Public Employees’ Retirement System: Establishment; review of System; use of state services; public inspection of certain records; liability of public employers

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 286.110  Public Employees’ Retirement System: Establishment; review of System; use of state services; public inspection of certain records; liability of public employers.

      1.  A system of retirement providing benefits for the retirement, disability or death of employees of public employers and funded on an actuarial reserve basis is hereby established and must be known as the Public Employees’ Retirement System. The System is a public agency supported by administrative fees transferred from the retirement funds. The Executive and Legislative Departments of the State Government shall regularly review the System.

      2.  The System is entitled to use any services provided to state agencies and shall use the services of the Purchasing Division of the Department of Administration, but is not required to use any other service. The purpose of this subsection is to provide to the Board the necessary autonomy for an efficient and economic administration of the System and its program.

      3.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 286.118, the official correspondence and records and, except as otherwise provided in NRS 241.035, the minutes, audio recordings, transcripts and books of the System are public records and are available for public inspection. A copy of the minutes or audio recordings must be made available to a member of the public upon request at no charge pursuant to NRS 241.035.

      4.  The respective participating public employers are not liable for any obligation of the System.

      [3:181:1947; 1943 NCL § 5230.03]—(NRS A 1975, 1030; 1977, 1576; 1993, 474, 1552; 1995, 524; 2005, 1409; 2013, 328; 2019, 1174)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Nev. Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 429 P.3d 280 (Nev. 2018).
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Nev. Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 429 P.3d 280 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 18× “Because individual files of government retirees are confidential, PERS argues, so too should custom reports that are generated exclusively from these files.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 313 P.3d 221 (Nev. 2013). · cites it 14× “Specifically, we address the scope of confidentiality set forth in NRS 286.110(3), which states that “[t]he official correspondence and records, other than the files of individual members or retired employees, .”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nevada Vs. Nevada Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 2018 NV 81 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 28× “The requested information was not declared confidential by statute PERS argues that the district court's order would erroneously require PERS to extract information from government retirees' individual files that are protected by NRS 286.110(3) and NRS 286.117. According to…”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nevada Vs. Nevada Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 2018 NV 81 (Nev. 2018). · cites it 28× “The requested information was not declared confidential by statute PERS argues that the district court's order would erroneously require PERS to extract information from government retirees' individual files that are protected by NRS 286.110(3) and NRS 286.117. According to…”
State, Dep't of Emp't, Training & Rehab. Vs. Sierra Nat'l Corp., 2020 NV 11 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 4× “3d at &PROM COURT OF NEVADA 5 (0) 1947A v(gago 224 (considering the extent to which governmental entity's records were exempt from the NPRA under NRS 286.110); Reno Newspapers, Inc. v. Haley, 126 Nev.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025). “The Nevada Constitution requires that “[t]he public employees’ retirement system must be governed by a public employees’ retirement board.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025). “Const. art. 9, § 2(4). The system provides retirement, disability, and death benefits for public employees and is funded based on actuarial reserve determinations.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 286.110(1) — 2 cases
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025). “The Nevada Constitution requires that “[t]he public employees’ retirement system must be governed by a public employees’ retirement board.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025). “Const. art. 9, § 2(4). The system provides retirement, disability, and death benefits for public employees and is funded based on actuarial reserve determinations.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 286.110(3) — 5 cases
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Nev. Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 429 P.3d 280 (Nev. 2018). “Because individual files of government retirees are confidential, PERS argues, so too should custom reports that are generated exclusively from these files.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Reno Newspapers, Inc., 313 P.3d 221 (Nev. 2013). “Specifically, we address the scope of confidentiality set forth in NRS 286.110(3), which states that “[t]he official correspondence and records, other than the files of individual members or retired employees, .”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nevada Vs. Nevada Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 2018 NV 81 (Nev. 2018). “The requested information was not declared confidential by statute PERS argues that the district court's order would erroneously require PERS to extract information from government retirees' individual files that are protected by NRS 286.110(3) and NRS 286.117. According to…”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nevada Vs. Nevada Policy Rsch. Inst., Inc., 2018 NV 81 (Nev. 2018). “The requested information was not declared confidential by statute PERS argues that the district court's order would erroneously require PERS to extract information from government retirees' individual files that are protected by NRS 286.110(3) and NRS 286.117. According to…”
State, Dep't of Emp't, Training & Rehab. Vs. Sierra Nat'l Corp., 2020 NV 11 (Nev. 2020). “3d at &PROM COURT OF NEVADA 5 (0) 1947A v(gago 224 (considering the extent to which governmental entity's records were exempt from the NPRA under NRS 286.110); Reno Newspapers, Inc. v. Haley, 126 Nev.”
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.