Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510 (2026)

Limitation of liability; exceptions for malicious acts if consideration is given or other duty exists

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 41.510  Limitation of liability; exceptions for malicious acts if consideration is given or other duty exists.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, an owner of any estate or interest in any premises, or a lessee or an occupant of any premises, owes no duty to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for participating in any recreational activity, or to give warning of any hazardous condition, activity or use of any structure on the premises to persons entering for those purposes.

      2.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, if an owner, lessee or occupant of premises gives permission to another person to participate in recreational activities upon those premises:

      (a) The owner, lessee or occupant does not thereby extend any assurance that the premises are safe for that purpose or assume responsibility for or incur liability for any injury to person or property caused by any act of persons to whom the permission is granted.

      (b) That person does not thereby acquire any property rights in or rights of easement to the premises.

      3.  This section does not:

      (a) Limit the liability which would otherwise exist for:

             (1) Willful or malicious failure to guard, or to warn against, a dangerous condition, use, structure or activity.

             (2) Injury suffered in any case where permission to participate in recreational activities was granted for a consideration other than the consideration, if any, paid to the landowner by the State or any subdivision thereof. For the purposes of this subparagraph, the price paid for a game tag sold pursuant to NRS 502.145 by an owner, lessee or manager of the premises shall not be deemed consideration given for permission to hunt on the premises.

             (3) Injury caused by acts of persons to whom permission to participate in recreational activities was granted, to other persons as to whom the person granting permission, or the owner, lessee or occupant of the premises, owed a duty to keep the premises safe or to warn of danger.

      (b) Create a duty of care or ground of liability for injury to person or property.

      4.  As used in this section, “recreational activity” includes, but is not limited to:

      (a) Hunting, fishing or trapping;

      (b) Camping, hiking or picnicking;

      (c) Sightseeing or viewing or enjoying archaeological, scenic, natural or scientific sites;

      (d) Hang gliding or paragliding;

      (e) Spelunking;

      (f) Collecting rocks;

      (g) Participation in winter sports, including cross-country skiing, snowshoeing or riding a snowmobile, or water sports;

      (h) Riding animals, riding in vehicles or riding a road, mountain or electric bicycle;

      (i) Studying nature;

      (j) Gleaning;

      (k) Recreational gardening; and

      (l) Crossing over to public land or land dedicated for public use.

      (Added to NRS by 1963, 799; A 1971, 192; 1973, 898; 1981, 157; 1991, 185, 2156; 1993, 1191; 1995, 54, 790; 2007, 631; 2021, 1744)

LIABILITY OF OWNER, LESSEE OR OCCUPANT OF PREMISES TO TRESPASSERS

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1969–2024 · leading case: Abbott v. City of Henderson, 542 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2024).
Abbott v. City of Henderson, 542 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2024). · cites it 48× “, this court set out the test for determining when an owner or occupant of land is protected frorn liability for another's recreational use of that land under NRS 41.510. 111 Nev. 608, 611, 894 P.2d 988, 990 (1995).”
Frasure v. United States, 256 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (D. Nev. 2003). · cites it 3× “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 41.510 Defendant contends that the Monite Site is the type of land contemplated by the statute.”
Boland v. Nevada Rock & Sand Co., 894 P.2d 988 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 13× “There are three huge reject sand piles inside the pit created by NRM’s operation and by the operation of Nevada Rock’s screening pit.”
Atkinson v. MGM Grand Hotel, Inc., 98 P.3d 678 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 3× “12 In addition, we noted that NRS 41.510 applied to the area. NRS 41.510 protects landowners from liability when their land is used for recreational purposes.”
Ducey v. United States, 523 F. Supp. 225 (D. Nev. 1981). · cites it 6× “” NRS 41.510, subsection 3, provides in pertinent part: “3.”
Martin Hayes v. City of Plummer, 357 P.3d 1276 (Idaho 2015). “” Nev. Rev. Stat § 41.510(3)(a)(2) (emphasis added).”
Neal v. Bently Nevada Corp., 771 F. Supp. 1068 (D. Nev. 1991). · cites it 3× “Nev.Rev.Stat.Ann. § 41.510 (Michie 1986).”
Frances Howard v. United States of Am. Us Sailing Ass'n, Inc. Waikiki Yacht Club, a Hawaii Corp. Guy S. Fleming, 181 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 1999). “§ 2A:42A-4(b); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 41.510(3)(a)(2). The use of the term “consideration” in these, statutes suggests that the legislatures intended a broad reading of the exception to immunity.”
Brannan v. Nevada Rock & Sand Co., 823 P.2d 291 (Nev. 1992). · cites it 2× “NRS 41.510 states that an occupier of open land owes no duty to keep the premises safe from entry or use by others for recreational purposes.”
Garfield v. United States, 297 F. Supp. 891 (W.D. Wis. 1969). “1967) ; Nev.Rev.Stat. § 41.510 (1967) ; N.H. Rev.”
Blair v. United States, 433 F. Supp. 217 (D. Nev. 1977). · cites it 2× “Defendant has now filed a motion for summary judgment relying on the Nevada Sightseer Statute, NRS 41.510. It must therefore be determined if the Sightseer Statute precludes liability, for plaintiff may recover under the Federal Tort Claims Act only if she has a right of…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510(1) — 2 cases
Abbott v. City of Henderson, 542 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2024). “, this court set out the test for determining when an owner or occupant of land is protected frorn liability for another's recreational use of that land under NRS 41.510. 111 Nev. 608, 611, 894 P.2d 988, 990 (1995).”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510(3)(a)(1) — 1 case
Abbott v. City of Henderson, 542 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2024). “, this court set out the test for determining when an owner or occupant of land is protected frorn liability for another's recreational use of that land under NRS 41.510. 111 Nev. 608, 611, 894 P.2d 988, 990 (1995).”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510(3)(a)(2) — 2 cases
Martin Hayes v. City of Plummer, 357 P.3d 1276 (Idaho 2015). “” Nev. Rev. Stat § 41.510(3)(a)(2) (emphasis added).”
Frances Howard v. United States of Am. Us Sailing Ass'n, Inc. Waikiki Yacht Club, a Hawaii Corp. Guy S. Fleming, 181 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 1999). “§ 2A:42A-4(b); Nev.Rev.Stat. § 41.510(3)(a)(2). The use of the term “consideration” in these, statutes suggests that the legislatures intended a broad reading of the exception to immunity.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510(3)(a)(l) — 2 cases
Frasure v. United States, 256 F. Supp. 2d 1180 (D. Nev. 2003). “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 41.510 Defendant contends that the Monite Site is the type of land contemplated by the statute.”
Boland v. Nevada Rock & Sand Co., 894 P.2d 988 (Nev. 1995). “There are three huge reject sand piles inside the pit created by NRM’s operation and by the operation of Nevada Rock’s screening pit.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.510(4) — 2 cases
Abbott v. City of Henderson, 542 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2024). “, this court set out the test for determining when an owner or occupant of land is protected frorn liability for another's recreational use of that land under NRS 41.510. 111 Nev. 608, 611, 894 P.2d 988, 990 (1995).”
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.