NRS
40.435 Judicial proceedings in violation of NRS 40.430;
provisions of NRS
40.430 as an affirmative defense.
1. The commencement of or participation in
a judicial proceeding in violation of NRS
40.430 does not forfeit any of the rights of a secured creditor in any real
or personal collateral, or impair the ability of the creditor to realize upon
any real or personal collateral, if the judicial proceeding is:
(a) Stayed or dismissed before entry of a final
judgment; or
(b) Converted into an action which does not
violate NRS 40.430.
2. If the provisions of NRS 40.430 are timely interposed as an
affirmative defense in such a judicial proceeding, upon the motion of any party
to the proceeding the court shall:
(a) Dismiss the proceeding without prejudice; or
(b) Grant a continuance and order the amendment
of the pleadings to convert the proceeding into an action which does not
violate NRS 40.430.
3. The failure to interpose, before the
entry of a final judgment, the provisions of NRS
40.430 as an affirmative defense in such a proceeding waives the defense in
that proceeding. Such a failure does not affect the validity of the final
judgment, but entry of the final judgment releases and discharges the mortgage
or other lien.
4. As used in this section, “final
judgment” means a judgment which imposes personal liability on the debtor for
the payment of money and which may be appealed under the Nevada Rules of
Appellate Procedure.
(Added to NRS by 1989,
1767)
Notes of Decisions
Bonicamp v. Vazquez, 91 P.3d 584 (Nev. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Conversion is allowed under NRS 40.435(1) and (2) when the initial action has not been concluded: 1.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
· cites it 36× “NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
· cites it 18× “NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
United States v. Cail, 746 F. Supp. 1035 (D. Nev. 1990).
“In particular, NRS 40.435 addresses judicial proceedings in violation of NRS 40.”
Edward Karayan v. Susan Mardian, 690 F. App'x 996 (9th Cir. 2017).
“Accordingly, the action was properly dismissed pursuant to Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.435 (2)(a). AFFIRMED.”
Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Giordano (Nev. 2015).
“2 2 We reject BB&T's alternative assertion that it is entitled to amend its complaint to comply with NRS 40.455. Despite BB&T's arguments to the contrary, NRS 40.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.435(1) — 1 case
Bonicamp v. Vazquez, 91 P.3d 584 (Nev. 2004).
“Conversion is allowed under NRS 40.435(1) and (2) when the initial action has not been concluded: 1.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.435(2) — 3 cases
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
“NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
“NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Giordano (Nev. 2015).
“2 2 We reject BB&T's alternative assertion that it is entitled to amend its complaint to comply with NRS 40.455. Despite BB&T's arguments to the contrary, NRS 40.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.435(3) — 3 cases
Bonicamp v. Vazquez, 91 P.3d 584 (Nev. 2004).
“Conversion is allowed under NRS 40.435(1) and (2) when the initial action has not been concluded: 1.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
“NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017).
“NRS 40.435. We have previously held, however, that in litigation the one- action rule may be waived if it is not timely asserted.”
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.