Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 40 - ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS IN PARTICULAR CASES CONCERNING PROPERTY
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495 (2026)

Waiver of rights; separate action to enforce obligation; limitation on amount of judgment; available defenses

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 40.495  Waiver of rights; separate action to enforce obligation; limitation on amount of judgment; available defenses.

      1.  The provisions of NRS 40.475 and 40.485 may be waived by the guarantor, surety or other obligor only after default.

      2.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5, a guarantor, surety or other obligor, other than the mortgagor or grantor of a deed of trust, may waive the provisions of NRS 40.430. If a guarantor, surety or other obligor waives the provisions of NRS 40.430, an action for the enforcement of that person’s obligation to pay, satisfy or purchase all or part of an indebtedness or obligation secured by a mortgage or lien upon real property may be maintained separately and independently from:

      (a) An action on the debt;

      (b) The exercise of any power of sale;

      (c) Any action to foreclose or otherwise enforce a mortgage or lien and the indebtedness or obligations secured thereby; and

      (d) Any other proceeding against a mortgagor or grantor of a deed of trust.

      3.  If the obligee maintains an action to foreclose or otherwise enforce a mortgage or lien and the indebtedness or obligations secured thereby, the guarantor, surety or other obligor may assert any legal or equitable defenses provided pursuant to the provisions of NRS 40.451 to 40.4639, inclusive.

      4.  If, before a foreclosure sale of real property, the obligee commences an action against a guarantor, surety or other obligor, other than the mortgagor or grantor of a deed of trust, to enforce an obligation to pay, satisfy or purchase all or part of an indebtedness or obligation secured by a mortgage or lien upon the real property:

      (a) The court must hold a hearing and take evidence presented by either party concerning the fair market value of the property as of the date of the commencement of the action. Notice of such hearing must be served upon all defendants who have appeared in the action and against whom a judgment is sought, or upon their attorneys of record, at least 15 days before the date set for the hearing.

      (b) After the hearing, if the court awards a money judgment against the guarantor, surety or other obligor who is personally liable for the debt, the court must not render judgment for more than:

             (1) The amount by which the amount of the indebtedness exceeds the fair market value of the property as of the date of the commencement of the action; or

             (2) If a foreclosure sale is concluded before a judgment is entered, the amount that is the difference between the amount for which the property was actually sold and the amount of the indebtedness which was secured,

Ê whichever is the lesser amount.

      5.  The provisions of NRS 40.430 may not be waived by a guarantor, surety or other obligor if the mortgage or lien:

      (a) Secures an indebtedness for which the principal balance of the obligation was never greater than $500,000;

      (b) Secures an indebtedness to a seller of real property for which the obligation was originally extended to the seller for any portion of the purchase price;

      (c) Is secured by real property which is used primarily for the production of farm products as of the date the mortgage or lien upon the real property is created; or

      (d) Is secured by real property upon which:

             (1) The owner maintains the owner’s principal residence;

             (2) There is not more than one residential structure; and

             (3) Not more than four families reside.

      (Added to NRS by 1987, 1643; A 1989, 1001; 2011, 1743; 2013, 3810; 2015, 3344)

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAIRMENT OF REAL COLLATERAL OF SECURED LENDER

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2002–2022 · leading case: Walters v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 263 P.3d 231 (Nev. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Walters v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 263 P.3d 231 (Nev. 2011). · cites it 3× “There may also be potential of double recovery when a guarantor waives the one-action rule pursuant to NRS 40.495(2); however, double recovery is not an issue in the instant case.”
Sandpointe Apts., LLC v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. Cnty. of Clark, 313 P.3d 849 (Nev. 2013). “465 (stating that its definition for indebtedness applies to NRS 40.495). NRS 40.465 provides a separate and distinct definition of indebtedness that applies in an action against a guarantor.”
Lowe Enter. Residential Partners, L.P. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 40 P.3d 405 (Nev. 2002). “453 provides: Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495: 1. It is hereby declared by the legislature to be against public policy for any document relating to the sale of real property to contain any provision whereby a mortgagor or the grantor of a deed of trust or a guarantor…”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). · cites it 68× “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). · cites it 34× “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 30× “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). · cites it 47× “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). · cites it 42× “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 35× “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 35× “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). · cites it 15× “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Lavi v. Dist. Ct. (Branch Banking) (Nev. 2013). · cites it 12× “453: "Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495." (Emphasis added.) Here, in permitting waivers by guarantors of NRS 40.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(2) — 9 cases
Walters v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 263 P.3d 231 (Nev. 2011). “There may also be potential of double recovery when a guarantor waives the one-action rule pursuant to NRS 40.495(2); however, double recovery is not an issue in the instant case.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(2)(b) — 2 cases
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(2)(c) — 2 cases
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(3) — 9 cases
Walters v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 263 P.3d 231 (Nev. 2011). “There may also be potential of double recovery when a guarantor waives the one-action rule pursuant to NRS 40.495(2); however, double recovery is not an issue in the instant case.”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(4) — 8 cases
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Sexton v. Lsref2 Apex Trust 2012 C/W 63132 (Nev. 2015). “459(1)'s fair value defenses do not apply directly to guarantors; instead, NRS 40.495(3) allows guarantors to invoke NRS 40.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(4)(a) — 2 cases
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(4)(b) — 2 cases
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
Bank of Nevada Vs. Petersen, 2016 NV 64 (Nev. 2016). “Applying the pre-2011 version of NRS 40.495, 1 we held that: When Lavi waived the one-rule action, BB&T was allowed to bring an action against him prior to completing the foreclosure on the secured property, but that waiver did not terminate the procedural requirements for…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(5) — 4 cases
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
Lavi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 38 (Nev. 2014). “Further, this interpretation can be fairly harmonized with NRS 40.495's 2011 amendment adding subsection 4.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(5)(a) — 2 cases
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.495(5)(d) — 2 cases
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
Hefetz Vs. Beavor, 2017 NV 46 (Nev. 2017). “453 ("Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.495. ."). Before 3 Hefetz does not refute that Beavor does, in fact, fall within the enumerated provisions of NRS 40.”
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.