Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 357 - SUBMISSION OF FALSE CLAIMS TO STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080 (2026)

Action by private plaintiff; venue of actions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 357.080  Action by private plaintiff; venue of actions.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS 357.100, a private plaintiff may bring an action pursuant to this chapter for a violation of NRS 357.040 on his or her own account and that of the State or a political subdivision, or both the State and a political subdivision. The action must be brought in the name of the State or the political subdivision, or both. After such an action is commenced, it may be dismissed only with written consent of the court and the Attorney General. The court and the Attorney General shall take into account the public purposes of this chapter and the best interests of the parties in dismissing the action or consenting to the dismissal, as applicable, and provide the reasons for dismissing the action or consenting to the dismissal, as applicable.

      2.  If a private plaintiff brings an action pursuant to this chapter, no person other than the Attorney General or the Attorney General’s designee may intervene or bring a related action pursuant to this chapter based on the facts underlying the first action.

      3.  An action may not be brought by a private plaintiff pursuant to this chapter:

      (a) Against a member of the Legislature or the Judiciary, an elected officer of the Executive Department of the State Government, or a member of the governing body of a political subdivision, if the action is based upon evidence or information known to the State or political subdivision at the time the action was brought.

      (b) If the action is based upon allegations or transactions that are the subject of a civil action or an administrative proceeding for a monetary penalty to which the State or political subdivision is already a party.

      4.  A complaint filed pursuant to this section must be placed under seal and so remain for at least 60 days or until the Attorney General or a designee of the Attorney General pursuant to NRS 357.070 has elected whether to intervene. No service may be made upon the defendant until so ordered by the court.

      5.  On the date the private plaintiff files a complaint, he or she shall send a copy of the complaint to the Attorney General by mail with return receipt requested. The private plaintiff shall send with each copy of the complaint a written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information he or she possesses. If a district attorney or city attorney has accepted a designation from the Attorney General pursuant to NRS 357.070, the Attorney General shall forward a copy of the complaint to the district attorney or city attorney, as applicable.

      6.  An action pursuant to this chapter may be brought in any judicial district in this State in which the defendant can be found, resides, transacts business or in which any of the alleged fraudulent activities occurred.

      (Added to NRS by 1999, 825, 826; A 2007, 2399; 2011, 375; 2013, 1046; 2015, 913; 2025, 1296)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2006–2023 · leading case: Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 22× “If the Attorney General intervenes, the private plaintiff remains a party to an action pursuant to NRS 357.080. 2. The Attorney General may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”
Nevada Ex Rel. Hager v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, LP, 812 F. Supp. 2d 1211 (D. Nev. 2011). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs brought the action pursuant to NRS § 357.080 for violations of NRS § 357.”
United States ex rel. Palmieri v. Alpharma, Inc., 928 F. Supp. 2d 840 (D. Maryland 2013). “§ 17 — 8— 406(7); Nev.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 357.080(2); N.H.Rev.”
Simonian v. Univ. & Cmty. Coll. Sys. of Nevada, 128 P.3d 1057 (Nev. 2006). “070; NRS 357.080; see also International Game Tech.”
United States Ex Rel. Rost v. Pfizer Inc., 446 F. Supp. 2d 6 (D. Mass. 2006). “12, § 5C(2); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 357.080; Tenn.Code Ann. § 71-5-183(b); Tex.”
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). · cites it 64× “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
In Re Pharm. Ind. Avg. Whole. Price Lit., 538 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D. Mass. 2008). “" Nev.Rev.Stat. § 357.080(3). Similarly, the Hawaii False Claims Act states that a person may not bring an action "[t]hat is based upon allegations or transactions that are the subject of a civil or criminal investigation by the State, civil suit, or an administrative civil…”
U.S. ex rel. Saldivar v. Fresenius Med. Care Holdings, Inc., 906 F. Supp. 2d 1264 (N.D. Ga. 2012). “Gov’t Code § 12652(c)(3); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080 . Relator avers that he complied with these requirements by providing each state’s Attorney General with a copy of the Complaint and all disclosure documents on January 24, 2011.”
Simonian v. Univ. & Cmty. Coll. Sys., 128 P.3d 1057 (Nev. 2006). “des, in relevant part, as follows: If any reprisal or retaliatory action is taken against a state officer or employee who discloses information concerning improper governmental action within 2 years after the information is disclosed, the state officer or employee may file a…”
Goldman, Ed.D. Vs. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. C/W 78822 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 7× “The district court dismissed Goldman's retaliation claim without prejudice because Goldman did not comply with the procedural prerequisites set forth in NRS 357.080. We conclude this was error. Nevada's FCA, which is modeled on the federal False Claims Act, is intended to…”
Goldman, Ed.D. Vs. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. C/W 78822 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 7× “The district court dismissed Goldman's retaliation claim without prejudice because Goldman did not comply with the procedural prerequisites set forth in NRS 357.080. We conclude this was error. Nevada's FCA, which is modeled on the federal False Claims Act, is intended to…”
United States ex rel. West v. Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc., 538 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D. Mass. 2008). “” Nev.Rev.Stat. § 357.080(3). Similarly, the Hawaii False Claims Act states that a person may not bring an action “[t]hat is based upon allegations or transactions that are the subject of a civil or criminal investigation by the State, civil suit, or an administrative civil…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(1) — 2 cases
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). “If the Attorney General intervenes, the private plaintiff remains a party to an action pursuant to NRS 357.080. 2. The Attorney General may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(2) — 3 cases
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). “If the Attorney General intervenes, the private plaintiff remains a party to an action pursuant to NRS 357.080. 2. The Attorney General may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”
United States ex rel. Palmieri v. Alpharma, Inc., 928 F. Supp. 2d 840 (D. Maryland 2013). “§ 17 — 8— 406(7); Nev.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 357.080(2); N.H.Rev.”
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(3) — 3 cases
In Re Pharm. Ind. Avg. Whole. Price Lit., 538 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D. Mass. 2008). “" Nev.Rev.Stat. § 357.080(3). Similarly, the Hawaii False Claims Act states that a person may not bring an action "[t]hat is based upon allegations or transactions that are the subject of a civil or criminal investigation by the State, civil suit, or an administrative civil…”
United States ex rel. West v. Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc., 538 F. Supp. 2d 367 (D. Mass. 2008). “” Nev.Rev.Stat. § 357.080(3). Similarly, the Hawaii False Claims Act states that a person may not bring an action “[t]hat is based upon allegations or transactions that are the subject of a civil or criminal investigation by the State, civil suit, or an administrative civil…”
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(3)(b) — 1 case
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(3)(h) — 1 case
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(4) — 4 cases
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). “If the Attorney General intervenes, the private plaintiff remains a party to an action pursuant to NRS 357.080. 2. The Attorney General may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”
Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Nev. 2023). “Like the statute in Madera, NRS 357.080 uses the terms "maintain" and "bring" at different points, indicating the Legislature's intent to distinguish the two terms rather than collapse them.”
Goldman, Ed.D. Vs. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. C/W 78822 (Nev. 2020). “The district court dismissed Goldman's retaliation claim without prejudice because Goldman did not comply with the procedural prerequisites set forth in NRS 357.080. We conclude this was error. Nevada's FCA, which is modeled on the federal False Claims Act, is intended to…”
Goldman, Ed.D. Vs. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. C/W 78822 (Nev. 2020). “The district court dismissed Goldman's retaliation claim without prejudice because Goldman did not comply with the procedural prerequisites set forth in NRS 357.080. We conclude this was error. Nevada's FCA, which is modeled on the federal False Claims Act, is intended to…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 357.080(5) — 1 case
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). “If the Attorney General intervenes, the private plaintiff remains a party to an action pursuant to NRS 357.080. 2. The Attorney General may move to dismiss the action for good cause.”
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.