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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999 (2026)

Civil and criminal penalties for violations

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 598.0999  Civil and criminal penalties for violations.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 598.0974, a person who violates a court order or injunction issued pursuant to the provisions of NRS 598.0903 to 598.0999, inclusive, upon a complaint brought by the Commissioner, the Director, the district attorney of any county of this State or the Attorney General shall forfeit and pay to the State General Fund a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each violation. For the purpose of this section, the court issuing the order or injunction retains jurisdiction over the action or proceeding. Such civil penalties are in addition to any other penalty or remedy available for the enforcement of the provisions of NRS 598.0903 to 598.0999, inclusive.

      2.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 598.0974, in any action brought pursuant to the provisions of NRS 598.0903 to 598.0999, inclusive, if the court finds that a person has willfully engaged in a deceptive trade practice, the Commissioner, the Director, the district attorney of any county in this State or the Attorney General bringing the action may recover a civil penalty not to exceed $15,000 for each violation. The court in any such action may, in addition to any other relief or reimbursement, award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

      3.  Except as otherwise provided in NRS 597.895, a natural person, firm, or any officer or managing agent of any corporation or association who knowingly and willfully engages in a deceptive trade practice:

      (a) For an offense involving a loss of property or services valued at $1,200 or more but less than $5,000, is guilty of a category D felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130.

      (b) For an offense involving a loss of property or services valued at $5,000 or more but less than $25,000, is guilty of a category C felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130.

      (c) For an offense involving a loss of property or services valued at $25,000 or more but less than $100,000, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 10 years, and by a fine of not more than $10,000.

      (d) For an offense involving a loss of property or services valued at $100,000 or more, is guilty of a category B felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 20 years, and by a fine of not more than $15,000.

      (e) For any offense other than an offense described in paragraphs (a) to (d), inclusive, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Ê The court may require the natural person, firm, or officer or managing agent of the corporation or association to pay to the aggrieved party damages on all profits derived from the knowing and willful engagement in a deceptive trade practice and treble damages on all damages suffered by reason of the deceptive trade practice.

      4.  If a person violates any provision of NRS 598.0903 to 598.0999, inclusive, 598.100 to 598.2801, inclusive, 598.405 to 598.525, inclusive, 598.741 to 598.787, inclusive, 598.840 to 598.966, inclusive, or 598.9701 to 598.9718, inclusive, fails to comply with a judgment or order of any court in this State concerning a violation of such a provision, or fails to comply with an assurance of discontinuance or other agreement concerning an alleged violation of such a provision, the Commissioner or the district attorney of any county may bring an action in the name of the State of Nevada seeking:

      (a) The suspension of the person’s privilege to conduct business within this State; or

      (b) If the defendant is a corporation, dissolution of the corporation.

Ê The court may grant or deny the relief sought or may order other appropriate relief.

      5.  If a person violates any provision of NRS 228.500 to 228.640, inclusive, fails to comply with a judgment or order of any court in this State concerning a violation of such a provision, or fails to comply with an assurance of discontinuance or other agreement concerning an alleged violation of such a provision, the Attorney General may bring an action in the name of the State of Nevada seeking:

      (a) The suspension of the person’s privilege to conduct business within this State; or

      (b) If the defendant is a corporation, dissolution of the corporation.

Ê The court may grant or deny the relief sought or may order other appropriate relief.

      6.  In an action brought by the Commissioner or the Attorney General pursuant to subsection 4 or 5, process may be served by an employee of the Consumer Affairs Unit of the Department of Business and Industry or an employee of the Attorney General.

      7.  As used in this section:

      (a) “Property” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 193.0225.

      (b) “Services” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 205.0829.

      (c) “Value” means the fair market value of the property or services at the time the deceptive trade practice occurred. The value of a written instrument which does not have a readily ascertainable market value is the greater of the face amount of the instrument less the portion satisfied or the amount of economic loss to the owner of the instrument resulting from the deprivation of the instrument. The trier of fact shall determine the value of all other property whose value is not readily ascertainable, and may, in making that determination, consider all relevant evidence, including evidence of the value of the property to its owner.

      (Added to NRS by 1973, 1488; A 1983, 885; 1985, 1483, 2255, 2260; 1993, 1957; 1995, 1306, 2176; 1997, 603; 1999, 3334; 2001, 482, 660, 982, 2150; 2003, 1824, 2875, 2887; 2005, 1229, 1251, 1430; 2007, 741; 2009, 1191, 2716; 2011, 2652; 2013, 1033, 1054; 2015, 3653; 2017, 1312, 1535, 4062, 4353; 2021, 1351, 1451; 2023, 1192; 2025, 1090)

PYRAMID PROMOTIONAL SCHEMES; ENDLESS CHAINS

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2012–2025 · leading case: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Dist. Ct., 2022 NV 55 (Nev. 2022).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Dist. Ct., 2022 NV 55 (Nev. 2022). · cites it 4× “0963; NRS 598.0999. A reasonable argument can ’The Camachos did not make this argument in their opposition to the original motion to dismiss, and the district court did not address it in either its original order granting the motion to dismiss or its reconsideration order,…”
Nevada v. Bank of Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661 (9th Cir. 2012). “See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 598.0999(2). Third, it seeks injunctive relief, with respect to which the State faces a much lower stan: dard of proof than would be required for a lawsuit brought by individual consumers.”
Bontly v. Audi of Am., LLC (D. Nev. 2025). · cites it 4× “NRS § 598.0999(3). 19 Punitive damages are not available for the SAC’s warranty claims because they are 20 contract-based.”
Axon Enter., Inc. v. Luxury Home Buyers, LLC (D. Nev. 2023). · cites it 2× “146 So I find that whether there was any misrepresentation as to the 20 quality of LHB’s refurbishment presents a material factual dispute that must be resolved by a 21 143 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999 (3). 22 144 Nev.”
Cabral Vs. Caesars Entm'T Corp. (Nev. 2020). “See NRS 598.0999. NRS 598.0923(3), also known as the borrowing provision, provides that a party engages in a deceptive trade practice if he or she knowingly "[v]iolates a state or federal statute or regulation relating to the sale or lease of goods or services.”
The Est. Of Christopher Rosales Vs. Ctb Labs, Llc (Nev. 2020). “We are not persuaded that this amounts to reversible error, as appellants would not have been entitled to additional damages for those claims. See Breen v. Caesars Palace, 102 Nev.”
Kalthoff v. Douglas Cnty. (D. Nev. 2021). “050(C) notes operating a VHR without a permit is a “deceptive trade practice subject to 9 the penalties found in NRS Chapter 598,” but it does not state its authority for its own fine stems 10 from the statute.”
Kalthoff v. Douglas Cnty. (D. Nev. 2021). “050(C) notes operating a VHR without a permit is a “deceptive trade practice subject to 9 the penalties found in NRS Chapter 598,” but it does not state its authority for its own fine stems 10 from the statute.”
Jodi Tapply v. Whirlpool Corp. (6th Cir. 2025). “Plaintiffs allege Whirlpool violated the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999 , et seq. Plaintiffs charge that Whirlpool did not argue, and the district court did not hold, that their Nevada statutory claims failed for a lack of duty to disclose.”
State of Nevada v. Bank of Am. Corp. (9th Cir. 2012). “See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999 (2). Third, it seeks injunctive relief, with respect to which the State faces a much lower standard of proof than would be required for a lawsuit brought by individual consumers.”
Zandian v. Margolin C/W 65205 (Nev. 2015). “Although NRS 598.0999(2) addresses public causes of action, NRS 41.”
Zandian v. Margolin C/W 65205 (Nev. 2015). “Although NRS 598.0999(2) addresses public causes of action, NRS 41.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999(2) — 5 cases
Nevada v. Bank of Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661 (9th Cir. 2012). “See Nev.Rev.Stat. § 598.0999(2). Third, it seeks injunctive relief, with respect to which the State faces a much lower stan: dard of proof than would be required for a lawsuit brought by individual consumers.”
Kalthoff v. Douglas Cnty. (D. Nev. 2021). “050(C) notes operating a VHR without a permit is a “deceptive trade practice subject to 9 the penalties found in NRS Chapter 598,” but it does not state its authority for its own fine stems 10 from the statute.”
Kalthoff v. Douglas Cnty. (D. Nev. 2021). “050(C) notes operating a VHR without a permit is a “deceptive trade practice subject to 9 the penalties found in NRS Chapter 598,” but it does not state its authority for its own fine stems 10 from the statute.”
Zandian v. Margolin C/W 65205 (Nev. 2015). “Although NRS 598.0999(2) addresses public causes of action, NRS 41.”
Zandian v. Margolin C/W 65205 (Nev. 2015). “Although NRS 598.0999(2) addresses public causes of action, NRS 41.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598.0999(3) — 2 cases
Bontly v. Audi of Am., LLC (D. Nev. 2025). “NRS § 598.0999(3). 19 Punitive damages are not available for the SAC’s warranty claims because they are 20 contract-based.”
The Est. Of Christopher Rosales Vs. Ctb Labs, Llc (Nev. 2020). “We are not persuaded that this amounts to reversible error, as appellants would not have been entitled to additional damages for those claims. See Breen v. Caesars Palace, 102 Nev.”
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.