Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 428 - INDIGENT PERSONS
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 428.095 (2026)

Liability insurance for persons rendering medical care

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 428.095  Liability insurance for persons rendering medical care.

      1.  Counties in which physicians, dentists, their respective assistants and county hospitals render treatment to indigents or needy persons without charge or at cost or below cost may procure, carry and maintain liability insurance protecting such members of the healing arts and hospitals and indemnifying them against any claim or action by or on behalf of any such indigent or needy person or contribute to the cost of such insurance.

      2.  If such insurance is provided it shall be coverage in the amount of at least $100,000 for each occurrence.

      3.  The liability insurance provided in subsections 1 and 2 shall provide for indemnity whether or not the physician, dentist, assistant or hospital is required by law or the rules of his or her profession to treat any indigent or needy person without charge.

      (Added to NRS by 1971, 1491; A 1977, 959)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1983–1983 · leading case: Gallegos v. S. Nevada Mem'l Hosp., 575 F. Supp. 824 (D. Nev. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gallegos v. S. Nevada Mem'l Hosp., 575 F. Supp. 824 (D. Nev. 1983). “However, this Court believes that Erie does not compel it to follow and apply Bruce to this case because the application of the charitable immunity rule to this case would not only raise havoc with the waiver of the sovereign immunity scheme enacted in 1965, as amended through…”
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 428.095(1): 1 case
Gallegos v. S. Nevada Mem'l Hosp., 575 F. Supp. 824 (D. Nev. 1983). “However, this Court believes that Erie does not compel it to follow and apply Bruce to this case because the application of the charitable immunity rule to this case would not only raise havoc with the waiver of the sovereign immunity scheme enacted in 1965, as amended through…”
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.