Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 597.810 (2026)

Remedies for unauthorized commercial use; liability of owner or employee of medium used for advertising

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 597.810  Remedies for unauthorized commercial use; liability of owner or employee of medium used for advertising.

      1.  Any commercial use of the name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness of another by a person, firm or corporation without first having obtained written consent for the use is subject to:

      (a) Injunctive relief to prevent or restrain the unauthorized use; and

      (b) An action at law for any injuries sustained by reason of the unauthorized use. In such a suit, the plaintiff may recover:

             (1) Actual damages, but not less than $750; and

             (2) Exemplary or punitive damages, if the trier of fact finds that the defendant knowingly made use of the name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness of another person without the consent required by NRS 597.790.

      2.  No owner or employee of any medium used for advertising is liable pursuant to this section for any unauthorized commercial use of a person’s name, voice, signature, photograph or likeness unless it is established that the owner or employee had actual knowledge of the unauthorized use.

      (Added to NRS by 1989, 1609)

DEVICES FOR AUTOMATIC DIALING AND ANNOUNCING

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2021 · leading case: Hetter v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 874 P.2d 762 (Nev. 1994).
Hetter v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 874 P.2d 762 (Nev. 1994). · cites it 2× “The only issue on which the patient information could conceivably be relevant is on the issue of damages. Sanchez alleges that she is entitled to the profits that Hetter obtained by the unauthorized use of her picture on the theory of unjust enrichment.”
Sears v. Russell Road Food & Beverage, LLC (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “that Russell Road owed them a duty to ensure that it was 19 not using their images “without authorization in such a way that it infringed on [their] property 20 and publicity rights,” a duty to maintain policies and procedures to prevent that unauthorized use 21 of their images…”
Envtech, Inc. v. Litwin (D. Nev. 2021). “Presently, Plaintiff moves for the entry of judgment seeking a permanent injunction, attorney 20 fees, and litigation costs.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 597.810(1) — 1 case
Sears v. Russell Road Food & Beverage, LLC (D. Nev. 2020). “that Russell Road owed them a duty to ensure that it was 19 not using their images “without authorization in such a way that it infringed on [their] property 20 and publicity rights,” a duty to maintain policies and procedures to prevent that unauthorized use 21 of their images…”
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.