Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 51 - HEARSAY

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 51.115

Statements for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 51.115  Statements for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment.  Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain or sensations, or the inception or general character of the cause or external source thereof are not inadmissible under the hearsay rule insofar as they were reasonably pertinent to diagnosis or treatment.

      (Added to NRS by 1971, 795)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Felix v. State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Felix v. State (1993) nev · cites it 8× “Nor do we believe the statements to psychologist Bay were statements made to a health care profes *180 sional for the purpose of treatment, and therefore admissible pursuant to NRS 51.115 as statements made in the course of securing medical diagnosis or treatment.”
Chavez v. State (2009) nev · cites it 3× “’s written statement was not testimonial. Having concluded that D.”
Koerschner v. State (2000) nev · cites it 5× “NRS 51.115 provides: Statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain or sensations, or the inception or general character of the cause or external source thereof are not inadmissible under the…”
Flores v. State (2005) nev “355 (statements of personal or family history), or nonaccusatory hearsay evidence where the declarant’s availability is irrelevant, to wit: NRS 51.115 (statements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment); NRS 51.”
Walker v. State (1997) nev “Therefore, his testimony was not admissible under the medical diagnosis exception to the hearsay rule, NRS 51.115. *872 Dr. Pitterman was not a disinterested witness, but made his report at the request of defense counsel.”
Ramirez v. State (1998) nev · cites it 2× “Finkel's findings could be introduced pursuant to NRS 51.115 as a statement made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment, we have previously maintained in the child sexual assault context that when examinations at the instigation of law enforcement personnel are…”
Bynoe (Michael) Vs. Warden (2021) nev · cites it 2× “See NRS 51.115 (providing hearsay rule does not bar statements made for purpose of medical treatment or diagnosis); see also NRS 49.”
Ogunbanwo (Olaitan) Vs. State (2021) nev · cites it 2× “035 (defining hearsay); NRS 51.115 (providing that "[s]tatements made for the purpose of medical diagnosis or treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain or sensations, or the inception or general character of the cause or external source thereof…”
Kravetz v. State of Nevada (2022) nvd · cites it 2× “105 for a then existing mental, 16 emotional, or physical condition, or NRS § 51.115, statements for the purposes of medical 17 diagnosis or treatment.”
Richardson (Daryn) v. State (2018) nev “'s statements to the SANE nurse were not for medical diagnosis, so the exception in NRS 51.115 for otherwise inadmissible SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 6 (0) 1947A [s]tatements made for purposes of medical diagnosis or treatment" does not apply.”
McCoy v. Bean (2025) nvd “025; NRS 51.115; Flores 4 v. State, 121 Nev. 706 , 718 n.”
Brady (Richard) v. State (2013) nev “Further, even assuming that the victim's testimony about what he was told by a medical professional was not admissible pursuant to NRS 51.115, the district court's error was harmless because the victim also testified that he suffered pain for an extended period of time as a…”
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.