Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 612 - UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 612.385 (2026)

Discharge for misconduct

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 612.385  Discharge for misconduct.  A person is ineligible for benefits for the week in which the person has filed a claim for benefits, if he or she was discharged from his or her last or next to last employment for misconduct connected with the person’s work, and remains ineligible until the person earns remuneration in covered employment equal to or exceeding his or her weekly benefit amount in each of not more than 15 weeks thereafter as determined by the Administrator in each case according to the seriousness of the misconduct.

      [Part 5:129:1937; A 1939, 115; 1941, 412; 1943, 239; 1947, 413; 1949, 277; 1951, 339; 1955, 698]—(NRS A 1973, 1782; 1975, 1001; 1979, 1071; 1993, 1823)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30 cases, 1968–2020 · leading case: Kolnik v. Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't, 908 P.2d 726 (Nev. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kolnik v. Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't, 908 P.2d 726 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 10× “On March 12, 1993, the appeals referee determined that, pursuant to NRS 612.385 [1] , "[t]he preponderance of evidence establishes that the claimant was negligent in the performance of his duties on December 28.”
Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Bundley, 148 P.3d 750 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 7× “According to the appeals referee, Bundley’s failure to notify her employer of her inability to report to work on those three days constituted misconduct disqualifying her from receiving benefits under NRS 612.385, which provides that an employee who is discharged for…”
Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't v. Holmes, 914 P.2d 611 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 8× “Pursuant to NRS 612.385, NESD denied Holmes’ claim because she was terminated for misconduct.”
State, Emp. SEC. Dept v. Evans, 901 P.2d 156 (Nev. 1995). · cites it 6× “There are three possible statutory grounds for denial of unemployment benefits: (1) NRS 612.380 — voluntarily leaving employment without good cause; (2) NRS 612.”
Clevenger v. Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't, 770 P.2d 866 (Nev. 1989). · cites it 3× “She was denied those benefits because she was discharged for misconduct within the meaning of NRS 612.385. 3 Appellant appealed the decision denying benefits and prevailed before the appeals referee.”
Jones v. Rosner, 719 P.2d 805 (Nev. 1986). · cites it 3× “See NRS 612.385. Following a hearing, an appeals referee affirmed the decision of the department.”
Kraft v. Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't, 717 P.2d 583 (Nev. 1986). · cites it 3× “Appellant’s subsequent application for unemployment benefits was denied on the ground that he had been terminated for misconduct within the meaning of NRS 612.385. 2 This determination was appealed to an appeals referee, who entered an order awarding benefits.”
Lellis v. Archie, 516 P.2d 469 (Nev. 1973). · cites it 4× “On August 12, 1971, that service determined appellant was disqualified for misconduct connected with her work from receiving benefits under NRS 612.385. On August 16, 1971, appellant filed notice of appeal from the service’s determination with the appeals tribunal.”
Barnum v. Williams, 436 P.2d 219 (Nev. 1968). · cites it 2× “The department thereupon made an award of unemployment benefits, concluding that Williams was discharged but not for misconduct under NRS 612.385. The employer upon being advised of that award filed an appeal which for the first time asserted the fact Williams had been involved…”
Leeson v. Basic Refractories, 705 P.2d 137 (Nev. 1985). · cites it 2× “After determining that Leeson was not terminated for misconduct within the meaning of NRS 612.385, 1 the Executive Director of the ESD granted Leeson unemployment benefits.”
Emp. Sec. Dep't of Nevada v. Verrati, 756 P.2d 1196 (Nev. 1988). · cites it 4× “The Employment Security Department denied Verrati’s claim on the basis that his refusal to take the blood test was a violation of an employer rule and misconduct in connection with work within the meaning of NRS 612.385. A hearing was held, and the hearing officer affirmed the…”
Nevada Emp. Sec. Dep't v. Nacheff, 757 P.2d 787 (Nev. 1988). · cites it 3× “The appeals referee denied Nacheff benefits pursuant to NRS 612.385 because she found that Nacheff had been discharged for misconduct connected with his work.”
Show all 30 citing cases →
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.