NRS
31.070 Third-party claims in property levied on; undertaking by
plaintiff; liability of sheriff; exception to sufficiency of sureties; hearing
to determine title to property.
1. If the property levied on is claimed by
a third person as the person’s property by a written claim verified by the
person’s oath or that of the person’s agent, setting out the person’s right to
the possession thereof, and served upon the sheriff, the sheriff must release
the property if the plaintiff, or the person in whose favor the writ of
attachment runs, fails within 7 days after written demand to give the sheriff
an undertaking executed by at least two good and sufficient sureties in a sum
equal to double the value of the property levied on. If such undertaking be
given, the sheriff shall hold the property. The sheriff, however, shall not be
liable for damages to any such third person for the taking or keeping of such
property if no claim is filed by any such third person.
2. Such undertaking shall be made in favor
of and shall indemnify such third person against loss, liability, damages,
costs and counsel fees by reason of such seizing, taking, withholding or sale
of such property by the sheriff. By entering into such an undertaking the
sureties thereunder submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the court and
irrevocably appoint the clerk of the court as agent upon whom any papers
affecting liability on the undertaking may be served. Liability on such
undertaking may be enforced on motion to the court without the necessity of an
independent action. The motion and such reasonable notice of the motion as the
court prescribes may be served on the clerk of the court, who shall forthwith
mail copies to the sureties if their addresses are known.
3. Exceptions to the sufficiency of the
sureties and their justification may be had and taken in the same manner as
upon an undertaking given in other cases under titles 2 and 3 of NRS. If they,
or others in their place, fail to justify at the time and place appointed, the
sheriff must release the property; but if no exception is taken within 7 days
after notice of receipt of the undertaking, the third person shall be deemed to
have waived any and all objections to the sufficiency of the sureties.
4. The sheriff may demand and exact the
undertaking herein provided for notwithstanding any defect, informality or
insufficiency of the verified claim served upon the sheriff.
5. Whenever a verified third-party claim
is served upon the sheriff upon levy of the writ of attachment, the plaintiff
or the third-party claimant is entitled to a hearing within 10 days therefrom
before the court having jurisdiction of the action, in order to determine title
to the property in question, which hearing must be granted by the court upon
the filing of an application or petition therefor. Seven days’ notice of such
hearing must be given to all parties to the action and all parties claiming an
interest in the property, or their attorneys, which notice must specify that the
hearing is for the purpose of determining title to the property in question.
The court may continue the hearing beyond the 10-day period, but good cause
must be shown for any such continuance.
[1911 CPA § 210 1/2; added 1933,
88; 1931 NCL § 8708.01]—(NRS A 1965,
550; 1973,
1178)
Notes of Decisions
Elliott v. Denton & Denton, 860 P.2d 725 (Nev. 1993).
· cites it 42× “The statute, NRS 31.070, is called a "third-party claims" statute.”
Detwiler Vs. Dist. Ct. (baker Boyer Nat'l Bank), 2021 NV 18 (Nev. 2021).
· cites it 4× “We reject this argument, as we have no difficulty understanding that the district coures order requires Detwiler to pay the Bank's fees from the time HH filed its NRS 31.070 application—i.e., March 2, 2018.”
LFC Mktg. Grp., Inc. v. Loomis, 8 P.3d 841 (Nev. 2000).
· cites it 3× “See NRS 31.070 (providing third-party hearing in writ of attachment context); NRS 21.”
Brooksby v. Nevada State Bank, 312 P.3d 501 (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 7× “120 (third-party claims concerning writs of garnishment in aid of execution) and NRS 31.070 (third-party claims statute). Again without holding a hearing, the district court denied their claims and petition, this time stating that the claims were untimely.”
All Nite Garage, Inc. v. AAA TOWING, OF RENO, 452 P.2d 902 (Nev. 1969).
· cites it 9× “Although the trial court found that the actions of the appellant in causing the tow truck to be attached were wrongful, it nevertheless found that the respondent’s right to recover was predicated on NRS 31.070. In Cooper v. Liebert, 81 Nev.”
Kulik v. Albers Inc., 532 P.2d 603 (Nev. 1975).
· cites it 6× “NRS 31.070. 1 *137 Respondent petitioned the trial court to determine title to the cows.”
Wantz v. Redfield, 326 P.2d 413 (Nev. 1958).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to the provisions of NRS 31.070, the appellant having failed to post bond for continued possession of the sheriff, the property was delivered to respondent as third party claimant.”
Cooper v. Liebert, 402 P.2d 989 (Nev. 1965).
· cites it 4× “Respondents, not parties to the litigation, filed a third party claim pursuant to NRS 31.070 and served appellant a notice to furnish an undertaking as provided therein.”
Clark NMSD, LLC v. Goldstein, 2022 NV 75 (Nev. 2022).
· cites it 12× “CLEC GF IPF NE COU CHPEF DEPUTY CLERK, Motion to dismiss appeal from a district court order denying relief in post-judgment collection proceedings under NRS 31.070. Motion denied. Law Office of Mitchell Stipp and Mitchell D.”
Brooks v. Mejia (Nev. 2016).
“3d 501 , 502 (2013) (recognizing that "[o]nly property owned by the judgment debtor is subject to garnishment, and questions regarding title to that property as between the judgment creditor and a third party are properly determined by the court having jurisdiction under NRS…”
Superpumper, Inc. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Leonard) (Nev. 2021).
“ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges district court orders denying claims of exemption from post- judgment enforcement proceedings and a claim brought under the third- party claims…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.070(1) — 5 cases
Detwiler Vs. Dist. Ct. (baker Boyer Nat'l Bank), 2021 NV 18 (Nev. 2021).
“We reject this argument, as we have no difficulty understanding that the district coures order requires Detwiler to pay the Bank's fees from the time HH filed its NRS 31.070 application—i.e., March 2, 2018.”
Brooksby v. Nevada State Bank, 312 P.3d 501 (Nev. 2013).
“120 (third-party claims concerning writs of garnishment in aid of execution) and NRS 31.070 (third-party claims statute). Again without holding a hearing, the district court denied their claims and petition, this time stating that the claims were untimely.”
All Nite Garage, Inc. v. AAA TOWING, OF RENO, 452 P.2d 902 (Nev. 1969).
“Although the trial court found that the actions of the appellant in causing the tow truck to be attached were wrongful, it nevertheless found that the respondent’s right to recover was predicated on NRS 31.070. In Cooper v. Liebert, 81 Nev.”
Clark NMSD, LLC v. Goldstein, 2022 NV 75 (Nev. 2022).
“CLEC GF IPF NE COU CHPEF DEPUTY CLERK, Motion to dismiss appeal from a district court order denying relief in post-judgment collection proceedings under NRS 31.070. Motion denied. Law Office of Mitchell Stipp and Mitchell D.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.070(2) — 2 cases
All Nite Garage, Inc. v. AAA TOWING, OF RENO, 452 P.2d 902 (Nev. 1969).
“Although the trial court found that the actions of the appellant in causing the tow truck to be attached were wrongful, it nevertheless found that the respondent’s right to recover was predicated on NRS 31.070. In Cooper v. Liebert, 81 Nev.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 31.070(5) — 2 cases
Clark NMSD, LLC v. Goldstein, 2022 NV 75 (Nev. 2022).
“CLEC GF IPF NE COU CHPEF DEPUTY CLERK, Motion to dismiss appeal from a district court order denying relief in post-judgment collection proceedings under NRS 31.070. Motion denied. Law Office of Mitchell Stipp and Mitchell D.”
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.