Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 463 - LICENSING AND CONTROL OF GAMING

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 463.368

Credit instruments: Validity; enforcement; redemption; penalties; regulations

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 463.368  Credit instruments: Validity; enforcement; redemption; penalties; regulations.

      1.  A credit instrument accepted on or after June 1, 1983, and the debt that the credit instrument represents are valid and may be enforced by legal process.

      2.  A licensee or a person acting on behalf of a licensee may accept an incomplete credit instrument which:

      (a) Is signed by a patron; and

      (b) States the amount of the debt in figures,

Ê and may complete the instrument as is necessary for the instrument to be presented for payment.

      3.  A licensee or person acting on behalf of a licensee:

      (a) May accept a credit instrument that is payable to an affiliated company or may complete a credit instrument in the name of an affiliated company as payee if the credit instrument otherwise complies with this subsection and the records of the affiliated company pertaining to the credit instrument are made available to agents of the Board upon request.

      (b) May accept a credit instrument either before, at the time or after the patron incurs the debt. The credit instrument and the debt that the credit instrument represents are enforceable without regard to whether the credit instrument was accepted before, at the time or after the debt is incurred.

      4.  This section does not prohibit the establishment of an account by a deposit of cash, recognized traveler’s check, or any other instrument which is equivalent to cash.

      5.  If a credit instrument is lost or destroyed, the debt represented by the credit instrument may be enforced if the licensee or person if acting on behalf of the licensee can prove the existence of the credit instrument.

      6.  A patron’s claim of having a mental or behavioral disorder involving gambling:

      (a) Is not a defense in any action by a licensee or a person acting on behalf of a licensee to enforce a credit instrument or the debt that the credit instrument represents.

      (b) Is not a valid counterclaim to such an action.

      7.  Any person who violates the provisions of this section is subject only to the penalties provided in NRS 463.310 to 463.318, inclusive. The failure of a person to comply with the provisions of this section or the regulations of the Commission does not invalidate a credit instrument or affect the ability to enforce the credit instrument or the debt that the credit instrument represents.

      8.  The Commission may adopt regulations prescribing the conditions under which a credit instrument may be redeemed or presented to a bank or credit union for collection or payment.

      9.  The Commission may adopt regulations:

      (a) Allowing a licensee to accept an electronic signature from a patron on a credit instrument; and

      (b) Prescribing the conditions for the validity of such an electronic signature.

      (Added to NRS by 1983, 828; A 1985, 798; 1989, 400; 1991, 817; 1995, 1499; 1999, 1500; 2021, 1303)

UNREDEEMED WAGERING VOUCHERS

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2022 · leading case: Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC (2014) nvd · cites it 4× “§ 463.368 (enforceability of markers under Nevada law is not dependant on presentation).”
Metropolitan Creditors Service v. Sadri (1993) calctapp · cites it 3× “Sadri subsequently stopped payment on the checks and memoranda, which were drawn on his account at a Redwood City bank. A Nevada statute makes credit instruments evidencing gambling debts owed to licensed persons, and the debts represented, valid and enforceable by legal process.”
Kramer v. Bally's Park Place, Inc. (1988) md “2d 10, 11 (1980) (changed by later statutory enactment, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 463.368 (1983)). See also, Lane & Pyron, Inc.”
LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC (2018) nev “LaBarbera also claims that the district court erred when it excluded evidence of his gambling addiction, but we conclude this claim lacks merit under NRS 463.368(6) (stating that a patron's claim of having a gambling disorder is not a defense in an action to enforce a gambling…”
Sigel v. McEvoy (1985) nev “361(1) is applicable only to transactions occurring on or after the effective date of the statute, May 26, 1983); see also NRS 463.368(1). Accordingly, we must look to the dictates of the common law to determine the enforceability of the parties’ agreement.”
Desert Palace, Inc. v. Michael (2019) nvd · cites it 3× “Nev. Rev. Stat. § 463.368 (1), (3)(b) ; ECF No.”
Desert Palace, Inc. v. Michael (2020) nvd · cites it 4× “3 Michael also objects to my grant of summary judgment in favor of Caesars on its fraud 4 claim,22 which was based on facts deemed established as a sanction forMichael’s discovery 5 violations.”
In Re Jafari (2007) wiwb “§ 335, now codified at Nev.Rev.Stat. § 463.368. The Nevada legislature finally acted because the gaming collection rate, generally 95%, had "dipped below 90% for the first time in history.”
Rood v. Commissioner (1996) tax · cites it 2× “A gaming debt evidenced by a credit instrument was legally enforceable pursuant to Nevada law when petitioner incurred his debt to Caesar's.”
Estate of Chagra v. Commissioner (1990) tax · cites it 2× “Nevada legislation effective in 1983 made certain gambling debts legally enforceable provided they are evidenced by a credit agreement meeting certain requirements.”
LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC (2018) nev · cites it 2× “LaBarbera also claims that the district court erred when it excluded evidence of his gambling addiction, but we conclude this claim lacks merit under NRS 463.368(6) (stating that a patron's claim of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 3 The district court abused its discretion by…”
MGM Grand Hotel v. Long (2022) nvd · cites it 2× “” NRS 23 § 463.368(1); see also Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC, 995 F.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 463.368(1) — 5 cases
Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC (2014) nvd “§ 463.368 (enforceability of markers under Nevada law is not dependant on presentation).”
Sigel v. McEvoy (1985) nev “361(1) is applicable only to transactions occurring on or after the effective date of the statute, May 26, 1983); see also NRS 463.368(1). Accordingly, we must look to the dictates of the common law to determine the enforceability of the parties’ agreement.”
Baluma, S.A. v. Davydov (2022) nvd
Baluma, S.A. v. Chow (2022) nvd
MGM Grand Hotel v. Long (2022) nvd “” NRS 23 § 463.368(1); see also Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC, 995 F.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 463.368(2) — 1 case
MGM Grand Hotel v. Long (2022) nvd “” NRS 23 § 463.368(1); see also Morales v. Aria Resort & Casino, LLC, 995 F.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 463.368(6) — 3 cases
LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC (2018) nev “LaBarbera also claims that the district court erred when it excluded evidence of his gambling addiction, but we conclude this claim lacks merit under NRS 463.368(6) (stating that a patron's claim of having a gambling disorder is not a defense in an action to enforce a gambling…”
LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC (2018) nev “LaBarbera also claims that the district court erred when it excluded evidence of his gambling addiction, but we conclude this claim lacks merit under NRS 463.368(6) (stating that a patron's claim of SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 3 The district court abused its discretion by…”
LABARBERA VS. WYNN LAS VEGAS, LLC (2018) nev
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.