Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 598 - DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0953 (2026)

Engaging in deceptive trade practice prima facie evidence of intent to injure competitor; other rights of action not limited

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 598.0953  Engaging in deceptive trade practice prima facie evidence of intent to injure competitor; other rights of action not limited.

      1.  Evidence that a person has engaged in a deceptive trade practice is prima facie evidence of intent to injure competitors and to destroy or substantially lessen competition.

      2.  The deceptive trade practices listed in NRS 598.0915 to 598.0925, inclusive, are in addition to and do not limit the types of unfair trade practices actionable at common law or defined as such in other statutes of this State.

      (Added to NRS by 1973, 1484; A 1985, 2258; 1989, 649; 2007, 738; 2013, 1031; 2017, 1532, 4350; 2021, 1347, 1448)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2007–2024 · leading case: S. Serv. Corp. v. Excel Bldg. Servs., Inc., 617 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (D. Nev. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
S. Serv. Corp. v. Excel Bldg. Servs., Inc., 617 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (D. Nev. 2007). · cites it 4× “NRS 598.0953(1) states: “Evidence that a person has engaged in a deceptive trade practice is prima facie evidence of intent to injure competitors and to destroy or substantially lessen competition.”
GandyDancer, LLC v. Rock House CGM, LLC, 2019 NMSC 021 (N.M. 2019). “(emphasis added) (quoting Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0953 (1) (2007, amended 2017)).”
Watkins v. Rapid Fin. Solutions, Inc. (D. Nev. 2022). · cites it 2× “0923(3), 24 conversion and unjust enrichment under NRS § 598.0953, and the Takings Clause of 25 Article I of the Nevada Constitution.”
BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP v. AIM Grp. Corp. (D. Nev. 2024). “§ 598.0953(1). Thus, “a 4 business shown to be engaged in deceptive trade practices is presumed to intend for those 5 practices to injure its competitors and destroy competition.”
BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP v. AIM Grp. Corp. (D. Nev. 2024). “§ 598.0953(1). Thus, “a 14 business shown to be engaged in deceptive trade practices is presumed to intend for those 15 practices to injure its competitors and destroy competition.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0953(1) — 3 cases
S. Serv. Corp. v. Excel Bldg. Servs., Inc., 617 F. Supp. 2d 1097 (D. Nev. 2007). “NRS 598.0953(1) states: “Evidence that a person has engaged in a deceptive trade practice is prima facie evidence of intent to injure competitors and to destroy or substantially lessen competition.”
BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP v. AIM Grp. Corp. (D. Nev. 2024). “§ 598.0953(1). Thus, “a 4 business shown to be engaged in deceptive trade practices is presumed to intend for those 5 practices to injure its competitors and destroy competition.”
BBK Tobacco & Foods, LLP v. AIM Grp. Corp. (D. Nev. 2024). “§ 598.0953(1). Thus, “a 14 business shown to be engaged in deceptive trade practices is presumed to intend for those 15 practices to injure its competitors and destroy competition.”
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.