Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 50 - WITNESSES

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.265

Opinions: Lay witnesses

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 50.265  Opinions: Lay witnesses.  If the witness is not testifying as an expert, the witness’s testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are:

      1.  Rationally based on the perception of the witness; and

      2.  Helpful to a clear understanding of the testimony of the witness or the determination of a fact in issue.

      (Added to NRS by 1971, 793)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Kyle Rodney v. Timothy Filson
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kyle Rodney v. Timothy Filson (2019) ca9 “See Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 50.265 , 50.275. The record also reveals that trial counsel failed to use Monko’s medical records for impeachment purposes, failed to call an expert witness to explain the records, and failed to call any treating medical providers, even though Monko’s…”
Lord v. State (1991) nev · cites it 2× “In any event, layperson opinion pursuant to NRS 50.265 is not an appropriate vehicle to illuminate the cause of these types of injuries.”
Beattie v. Thomas (1983) nev “Under NRS 50.265, a lay opinion is admissible only when the opinion is both “rationally based on the perception *587 of the witness” and “helpful to a clear understanding of his testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.”
Mulder v. State (2000) nev “*14 Although NRS 50.265 permits the presentation of lay opinion testimony, it is clear in this case that the court permitted Doulder to testify as if he were an expert even after the court concluded he was not an expert.”
Stephans v. State (2011) nev “Nor did the State establish that Scott had the personal knowledge required to give lay opinion testimony under NRS 50.265, or offer the price tags themselves in evidence.”
Construction Industry Workers' Compensation Group Ex Rel. Mojave Electric v. Chalue (2003) nev “12 NRS 50.265. 13 See Lerner Shops v. Marin, 83 Nev.”
Mosley v. Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline (2004) nev · cites it 2× “NRS 50.265 provides that lay witness testimony must be "[r]ationally based on the perception of the witness" and "[h]elpful to a clear understanding of his testimony or the determination of a fact in issue.”
Estes v. State (2006) nev “42 See NRS 50.265. 43 See Chapman v. California, 386 U.”
Jezdik v. State (2005) nev “Thus, it appears at first blush that his testimony that the signatures matched was improper under NRS 50.265(2) as being unhelpful to the jury.”
Sterling v. State (1992) nev “NRS 50.265. Sterling has not shown how this testimony would have been “rationally based on the perception” of the victim’s mother.”
Rossana v. State (1997) nev “3 NRS 50.265 provides that: If the witness is not testifying as an expert, his testimony in the form of opinions or inferences is limited to those opinions or inferences which are: 1.”
Pandelis Constraction Co. v. Jones-Viking Associates (1987) nev “See NRS 50.265. 2 *131 As a final assignment of error, Pandelis notes that the court admitted certain summaries of financial documents but said they were admitted not as evidence, but only as statements of the builder’s position.”
Show all 54 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 50.265(2) — 1 case
Jezdik v. State (2005) nev “Thus, it appears at first blush that his testimony that the signatures matched was improper under NRS 50.265(2) as being unhelpful to the jury.”
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.