Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 51.067 (2026)

Hearsay within hearsay

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 51.067  Hearsay within hearsay.  Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statements conforms to an exception to the hearsay rule provided in this chapter.

      (Added to NRS by 1971, 798)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1986–2020 · leading case: Weber v. State, 119 P.3d 107 (Nev. 2005).
Weber v. State, 119 P.3d 107 (Nev. 2005). · cites it 4× “[20] NRS 51.067. [21] Deutscher v. State, 95 Nev.”
Shaw v. State, 753 P.2d 888 (Nev. 1988). “NRS 51.067. Couzens’s testimony concerning Shaw’s statements over the telephone were properly admitted since they were statements of a party offered against that party.”
Mishler v. McNally, 730 P.2d 432 (Nev. 1986). “065; NRS 51.067. The memo was also inadmissible because of a lack of foundation as to its authenticity and identity.”
In Re: Est. of Scheide, Jr., 2020 NV 84 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “065; NRS 51.067, this testimony does not show that Theodore wished to change the disposition of his will to support finding revocation.”
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.