NRS
41.0337 State or political subdivision to be named party defendant.
1. No tort action arising out of an act or
omission within the scope of a person’s public duties or employment may be
brought against any present or former:
(a) Local judicial officer or state judicial
officer;
(b) Officer or employee of the State or of any
political subdivision;
(c) Immune contractor; or
(d) State Legislator,
Ê unless the
State or appropriate political subdivision is named a party defendant under NRS 41.031.
2. No tort action may be brought against a
person who is named as a defendant in the action solely because of an alleged
act or omission relating to the public duties or employment of any present or
former:
(a) Local judicial officer or state judicial
officer;
(b) Officer or employee of the State or of any
political subdivision;
(c) Immune contractor; or
(d) State Legislator,
Ê unless the
State or appropriate political subdivision is named a party defendant under NRS 41.031.
3. As used in this section:
(a) “Local judicial officer” has the meaning
ascribed to it in NRS 41.03377.
(b) “State judicial officer” has the meaning
ascribed to it in NRS 41.03385.
(Added to NRS by 1975,
896; A 1977,
481, 1537;
1979,
1731; 1987,
540; 2013,
1494)
Legal Representation
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
45
cases (
21 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case:
Craig v. Donnelly, 439 P.3d 413 (Nev. 2019).
Craig v. Donnelly, 439 P.3d 413 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 17× “031 and NRS 41.0337 in order to properly proceed with civil rights claims brought pursuant to 42 U.”
Nunnelley v. Douglas Cnty., 622 F. Supp. 124 (D. Nev. 1985).
· cites it 2× “He asserts that because NRS § 41.0337 requires Douglas County be named as an indispensable party for any state tort claims against its employees, this Court has jurisdiction over the county.”
Henderson v. Bonaventura, 994 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (D. Nev. 2014).
· cites it 4× “LTVCO Defendants argue that NRS section 41.0337 prevents dismissal of the County as a Defendant.”
Craig Vs. Donnelly, 2019 NV 6 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 32× “031 and NRS 41.0337 in order to properly proceed with civil rights claims brought COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA (0) 19478 0)gAzo pursuant to 42 U.”
Craig v. Dr. Donnelly (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 32× “031 and NRS 41.0337 in order to properly proceed with civil rights claims brought COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA (0) 19478 0)gAzo pursuant to 42 U.”
Craig Vs. Donnelly, 2019 NV 6 (Nev. 2019).
· cites it 16× “031 and NRS 41.0337 in order to properly proceed with civil rights claims brought COURT OF APPEALS OF NEVADA (0) 19478 0)gAzo pursuant to 42 U.”
Hansen v. Schaefer (D. Nev. 2022).
· cites it 5× “28, 2022) (dismissing state tort claims where complying with NRS § 41.0337 in 11 federal court would conflict with the Eleventh Amendment).”
Hansen v. Schaefer (D. Nev. 2022).
· cites it 5× “28, 2022) (dismissing state tort claims where complying with NRS § 41.0337 in 11 federal court would conflict with the Eleventh Amendment).”
White v. Leavitt (D. Nev. 2023).
· cites it 5× “5 But that complaint was rejected because 19 White failed to adhere to the court’s earlier order permitting only limited amendment to his 20 21 2 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.0337 (2). 22 3 Nev. Rev.”
Hernandez-Bolanos v. Widmar (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 7× “031(2) and NRS 41.0337. In response, Hernandez conceded that, to the extent that his complaint was filed as a state tort action, dismissal for failure to name the State would be appropriate.”
Hernandez v. Palmer (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 7× “031(2) and NRS 41.0337. In response, Hernandez conceded that, to the extent that his complaint was filed as a state tort action, dismissal for failure to name the State would be appropriate.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.0337(1) — 2 cases
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.0337(2) — 2 cases
White v. Leavitt (D. Nev. 2023).
“5 But that complaint was rejected because 19 White failed to adhere to the court’s earlier order permitting only limited amendment to his 20 21 2 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.0337 (2). 22 3 Nev. Rev.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.0337(l) — 1 case
Henderson v. Bonaventura, 994 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (D. Nev. 2014).
“LTVCO Defendants argue that NRS section 41.0337 prevents dismissal of the County as a Defendant.”
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.