Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645 (2026)

Notice of defect: Required before commencement of or addition to certain actions; content; persons authorized to provide notice; exceptions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 40.645  Notice of defect: Required before commencement of or addition to certain actions; content; persons authorized to provide notice; exceptions.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in this section and NRS 40.670, before a claimant commences an action or amends a complaint to add a cause of action for a constructional defect against a contractor, subcontractor, supplier or design professional, the claimant:

      (a) Must give written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the contractor, at the contractor’s address listed in the records of the State Contractors’ Board or in the records of the office of the county or city clerk or at the contractor’s last known address if the contractor’s address is not listed in those records; and

      (b) May give written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to any subcontractor, supplier or design professional known to the claimant who may be responsible for the constructional defect, if the claimant knows that the contractor is no longer licensed in this State or that the contractor no longer acts as a contractor in this State.

      2.  The notice given pursuant to subsection 1 must:

      (a) Include a statement that the notice is being given to satisfy the requirements of this section;

      (b) Specify in reasonable detail the defects or any damages or injuries to each residence or appurtenance that is the subject of the claim;

      (c) Describe in reasonable detail the cause of the defects if the cause is known and the nature and extent that is known of the damage or injury resulting from the defects; and

      (d) Include a signed statement, by each named owner of a residence or appurtenance in the notice, that each such owner verifies that each such defect, damage and injury specified in the notice exists in the residence or appurtenance owned by him or her. If a notice is sent on behalf of a homeowners’ association, the statement required by this paragraph must be signed under penalty of perjury by a member of the executive board or an officer of the homeowners’ association.

      3.  A representative of a homeowners’ association may send notice pursuant to this section on behalf of an association if the representative is acting within the scope of the representative’s duties pursuant to chapter 116 or 117 of NRS.

      4.  Notice is not required pursuant to this section before commencing an action if:

      (a) The contractor, subcontractor, supplier or design professional has filed an action against the claimant; or

      (b) The claimant has filed a formal complaint with a law enforcement agency against the contractor, subcontractor, supplier or design professional for threatening to commit or committing an act of violence or a criminal offense against the claimant or the property of the claimant.

      (Added to NRS by 1995, 2540; A 1997, 2718; 1999, 1440; 2003, 2042; 2015, 10; 2019, 2259)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2004–2022 · leading case: D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007).
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). · cites it 33× “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Waterfall Homeowners Ass'n v. Viega, Inc., 283 F.R.D. 571 (D. Nev. 2012). · cites it 6× “647(1), a court must dismiss the case without prejudice and compel the plaintiff to file such a notice before filing another action.”
Westpark Owners' Ass'n v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 167 P.3d 421 (Nev. 2007). · cites it 2× “See NRS 40.645 (requiring that claimant give written notice of constructional defects before filing a cause of action for a constructional defect).”
Shuette v. Beazer Homes Holdings Corp., 124 P.3d 530 (Nev. 2005). “Thus, at the time the homeowners’ complaint was filed in this matter, the NRS Chapter 40 prerequisites to maintaining a constructional defect claim were slightly different. Nonetheless, the former provisions contained notice and response prerequisites, and continuing duties,…”
Holcomb Condo. Homeowners' Ass'n v. Stewart Venture, LLC, 300 P.3d 124 (Nev. 2013). “In 2007, HCHA served a notice of constructional defect claims pursuant to NRS 40.645. In 2009, HCHA filed, on behalf of itself and all Holcomb Condominium homeowners, a constructional defect complaint against respondents, alleging a variety of defects and claims for negligence,…”
ANSE, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 192 P.3d 738 (Nev. 2008). “21 See NRS 40.645; NRS 40.647; NRS 40.655; D.R. Horton v.”
Desert Fireplaces Plus, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 97 P.3d 607 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 2× “695 requires a general notice of construction defect claims as outlined in NRS 40.645 (1997). If the Legislature desired that a more specific form of notice be given to absent third parties, it would have included such a requirement in the statute.”
Cincinnati Ins. v. AMSCO Windows, 921 F. Supp. 2d 1226 (D. Utah 2013). “See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 40.645. 5 Pursuant to Chapter 40, a contractor must also forward the notice to each subcontractor and/or supplier “whom the contractor reasonably believes is responsible for a defect specified in the notice.”
Dr Horton v. Dist. Ct., 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). · cites it 32× “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curiae [1] invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Byrne Vs. Sunridge Builders, Inc., 2020 NV 69 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 6× “In this appeal, we clarify that "commence means a claimant must have filed a lawsuit, not merely served notice of a construction defect pursuant to NRS 40.645, within the grace period to preserve his or her action.”
Probuilders Specialty Ins. v. Double M. Constr., 116 F. Supp. 3d 1173 (D. Nev. 2015). “§ 40.645. Double M does not oppose the request.”
Pulver v. Kane (D. Nev. 2022). · cites it 11× “646, read with NRS § 40.645, does not require Pulver to provide A&E notice of 4 Lakeshore LLC’s Chapter 40 claim.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(1) — 2 cases
Waterfall Homeowners Ass'n v. Viega, Inc., 283 F.R.D. 571 (D. Nev. 2012). “647(1), a court must dismiss the case without prejudice and compel the plaintiff to file such a notice before filing another action.”
Barrett v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 65 (Nev. 2014).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(1)(a) — 1 case
Pulver v. Kane (D. Nev. 2022). “646, read with NRS § 40.645, does not require Pulver to provide A&E notice of 4 Lakeshore LLC’s Chapter 40 claim.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(1)(b) — 1 case
Barrett v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2014 NV 65 (Nev. 2014).
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(2) — 2 cases
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Dr Horton v. Dist. Ct., 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curiae [1] invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(2)(b) — 1 case
Shuette v. Beazer Homes Holdings Corp., 124 P.3d 530 (Nev. 2005). “Thus, at the time the homeowners’ complaint was filed in this matter, the NRS Chapter 40 prerequisites to maintaining a constructional defect claim were slightly different. Nonetheless, the former provisions contained notice and response prerequisites, and continuing duties,…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(2)(c) — 2 cases
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Dr Horton v. Dist. Ct., 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curiae [1] invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(3) — 2 cases
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Dr Horton v. Dist. Ct., 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curiae [1] invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(4)(a) — 1 case
Pulver v. Kane (D. Nev. 2022). “646, read with NRS § 40.645, does not require Pulver to provide A&E notice of 4 Lakeshore LLC’s Chapter 40 claim.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(4)(b) — 1 case
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(4)(c) — 2 cases
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curaie 1 invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
Dr Horton v. Dist. Ct., 168 P.3d 731 (Nev. 2007). “: In this petition, we address the question of how district courts should determine the sufficiency of a pre-litigation notice of constructional defects under NRS 40.645. The parties and amici curiae [1] invite us to examine the reasonableness of a pre-litigation notice that…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 40.645(5) — 2 cases
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.