NRS
41.035 Limitation on award for damages in tort actions.
1. An award for damages in an action
sounding in tort brought under NRS 41.031
or against a present or former officer or employee of the State or any
political subdivision, immune contractor or State Legislator arising out of an
act or omission within the scope of the person’s public duties or employment
may not exceed the sum of $200,000, exclusive of interest computed from the date
of judgment, to or for the benefit of any claimant. An award may not include
any amount as exemplary or punitive damages.
2. The limitations of subsection 1 upon
the amount and nature of damages which may be awarded apply also to any action
sounding in tort and arising from any recreational activity or recreational use
of land or water which is brought against:
(a) Any public or quasi-municipal corporation
organized under the laws of this State.
(b) Any person with respect to any land or water
leased or otherwise made available by that person to any public agency.
(c) Any Indian tribe, band or community whether
or not a fee is charged for such activity or use. The provisions of this
paragraph do not impair or modify any immunity from liability or action
existing on February 26, 1968, or arising after February
26, 1968, in favor of any Indian tribe, band or community.
Ê The Legislature
declares that the purpose of this subsection is to effectuate the public policy
of the State of Nevada by encouraging the recreational use of land, lakes,
reservoirs and other water owned or controlled by any public or quasi-municipal
agency or corporation of this State, wherever such land or water may be
situated.
(Added to NRS by 1965,
1414; A 1968,
44; 1973,
1532; 1977,
985, 1539;
1979,
1736; 1987,
543; 1995,
1073; 2007,
3024, 3025;
2019,
3061)
Miscellaneous Provisions
Notes of Decisions
Cnty. of Clark ex rel. Univ. Med. Ctr. v. Upchurch, 961 P.2d 754 (Nev. 1998).
· cites it 34× “" Another provision in the parties' settlement agreement specified: Said settlement funds represent the statutory "cap" applicable to the State of Nevada pursuant to NRS 41.035, and in no way constitute a release of any actions, claims or rights that the undersigned may have…”
Martinez v. Maruszczak, 168 P.3d 720 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 16× “5 NRS 41.035; see also County of Clark v. Upchurch, 114 Nev.”
State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. v. Hill, 963 P.2d 480 (Nev. 1998).
· cites it 20× “05), claiming that the verdict contravened the language and policy of NRS 41.035, which limits recovery from the State to $50,000.”
Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Richardson Constr., Inc., 168 P.3d 87 (Nev. 2007).
· cites it 7× “: In this appeal, we consider whether appellant Clark County School District (CCSD) waived its right to assert the statutory damages limitation under NRS 41.035, which limits tort damages against a political subdivision to $50,000, when it did not mention the statutory cap as an…”
Falline v. GNLV CORP., 823 P.2d 888 (Nev. 1991).
· cites it 8× “While the goal of the majority is fairness, it seeks to reach this end by flagrant judicial legislation. The legislature is presumed to have known the law when enacting the measure to allow self-insurers.”
Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't v. Yeghiazarian, 312 P.3d 503 (Nev. 2013).
· cites it 9× “We also consider three other issues: (1) whether the district court abused its discretion by allowing an expert to testify based on an allegedly unreliable report, (2) whether the district court erred in reducing the jury verdict based on the deceased’s comparative negligence…”
Shafer v. City of Boulder, 896 F. Supp. 2d 915 (D. Nev. 2012).
· cites it 10× “State Claims Defendants cite to NRS § 41.035, arguing that the statute limits the amount a plaintiff may obtain in a tort action against a political subdivision.”
State v. Eaton, 710 P.2d 1370 (Nev. 1985).
· cites it 6× “245 before it reduced the jury award for the wrongful death claim to $50,000 under NRS 41.035. On her cross-appeal, Chrystal contends the district court erred by allocating the $29,000 Chrystal received in exchange for the release between her two claims.”
Peterson v. Miranda, 57 F. Supp. 3d 1271 (D. Nev. 2014).
· cites it 6× “Moving defendants now argue that punitive damages should be foreclosed because defendants are officers of a political subdivision and are protected under NRS § 41.035. NRS § 41.035 provides that an award of damages against a political subdivision of the state of Nevada, like…”
State v. Webster, 504 P.2d 1316 (Nev. 1972).
· cites it 6× “The State contends (1) that the Legislature has not so unalterably waived its sovereign immunity as to make it amenable to suit in this case; (2) that as a matter of law the trial court was required to find Billy Webster guilty of contributory negligence; and (3) that NRS 41.035…”
State v. Kallio, 557 P.2d 705 (Nev. 1976).
· cites it 4× “On motion by the *667 State, the district court amended the judgment to $25,000 pursuant to NRS 41.035 (l). 1 Here, the State contends (1) it cannot be held liable for Kallio’s injuries, (2) the doctrine of collateral estoppel bars Kallio’s action, and (3) the district court…”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.035(1): 34 cases
Martinez v. Maruszczak, 168 P.3d 720 (Nev. 2007).
“5 NRS 41.035; see also County of Clark v. Upchurch, 114 Nev.”
Cnty. of Clark ex rel. Univ. Med. Ctr. v. Upchurch, 961 P.2d 754 (Nev. 1998).
“" Another provision in the parties' settlement agreement specified: Said settlement funds represent the statutory "cap" applicable to the State of Nevada pursuant to NRS 41.035, and in no way constitute a release of any actions, claims or rights that the undersigned may have…”
Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't v. Yeghiazarian, 312 P.3d 503 (Nev. 2013).
“We also consider three other issues: (1) whether the district court abused its discretion by allowing an expert to testify based on an allegedly unreliable report, (2) whether the district court erred in reducing the jury verdict based on the deceased’s comparative negligence…”
State v. Eaton, 710 P.2d 1370 (Nev. 1985).
“245 before it reduced the jury award for the wrongful death claim to $50,000 under NRS 41.035. On her cross-appeal, Chrystal contends the district court erred by allocating the $29,000 Chrystal received in exchange for the release between her two claims.”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.035(1)(1995): 1 case
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.