Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 3 - DISTRICT COURTS
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 3.040 (2026)

Ex officio circuit judges; powers of Chief Justice to expedite judicial business

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 3.040  Ex officio circuit judges; powers of Chief Justice to expedite judicial business.

      1.  The district judges shall also serve as ex officio circuit judges, and in that capacity shall perform such judicial duties as may be designated by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as provided in subsection 2.

      2.  The Chief Justice shall seek to expedite judicial business and to equalize the work of the district judges, and shall provide for the assignment of any district judge to another district court to assist a court or judge whose calendar is congested, to act for a district judge who is disqualified or unable to act, or to sit and hold court where a vacancy in the office of district judge has occurred.

      [5:440:1955]—(NRS A 1961, 659; 1981, 1954)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1957–2008 · leading case: Walker v. Reynolds Elec. & Eng'g Co., 468 P.2d 1 (Nev. 1970).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Walker v. Reynolds Elec. & Eng'g Co., 468 P.2d 1 (Nev. 1970). · cites it 7× “Appellant now contends, notwithstanding his stipulation, that Judge Wright did not have jurisdiction to hear and decide this case absent his assignment to the Eighth Judicial District Court by the Chief Justice of Nevada pursuant to NRS 3.040. 1 He concedes NRS 3.220 2 confers…”
Flangas v. Herrmann, 677 P.2d 594 (Nev. 1984). “6, § 19, and NRS 3.040, which contemplate that only the Chief Justice may assign a judge to sit in a case outside his or her district.”
Matter of Est. of Herrmann, 677 P.2d 594 (Nev. 1984). “6, § 19, and NRS 3.040, which contemplate that only the Chief Justice may assign a judge to sit in a case outside his or her district.”
State ex rel. Masto v. Montero, 188 P.3d 47 (Nev. 2008). · cites it 2× “220, and (3) the Chief Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court may assign one judicial district court judge to conduct business in another district court under NRS 3.040(2). *576 The Attorney General has appealed the district court’s order arguing that NRS 293.”
Madison Nat'l Life Ins. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court, 449 P.2d 256 (Nev. 1969). “That action had previously been assigned to Judge Wilkes by order of the Supreme Court of Nevada on June 16, 1966, pursuant to the authority of NRS 3.040(2). Judge Wilkes, *8 who resides in Ely, Nevada, is the duly constituted judge of the Seventh Judicial District Court of…”
Misty Mgmt. Corp. v. First Jud. Dist. Court, 428 P.2d 196 (Nev. 1967). “Petitioners oppose this ground and urge the trial judge had jurisdiction under Rules 3 and 4 4 of the amendment to special rules of the First Judicial District Court and the Circuit Court Judges Act, NRS 3.040. 5 We should resolve these conflicting rules and statutes which…”
Close v. Second Jud. Dist. Court, 314 P.2d 379 (Nev. 1957). “NRS 3.040. The setting of trial dates, the ordering of postponements for cause and other matters having to do with arrangement of court calendars have always been considered as essentially within the discretion of the trial courts, and this court, in the absence of arbitrary…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 3.040(2) — 2 cases
State ex rel. Masto v. Montero, 188 P.3d 47 (Nev. 2008). “220, and (3) the Chief Justice of the Nevada Supreme Court may assign one judicial district court judge to conduct business in another district court under NRS 3.040(2). *576 The Attorney General has appealed the district court’s order arguing that NRS 293.”
Madison Nat'l Life Ins. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court, 449 P.2d 256 (Nev. 1969). “That action had previously been assigned to Judge Wilkes by order of the Supreme Court of Nevada on June 16, 1966, pursuant to the authority of NRS 3.040(2). Judge Wilkes, *8 who resides in Ely, Nevada, is the duly constituted judge of the Seventh Judicial District Court of…”
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.