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

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 612.533 (2026)

Introduction of certain evidence concerning claims for benefits prohibited in separate or subsequent proceeding

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 612.533  Introduction of certain evidence concerning claims for benefits prohibited in separate or subsequent proceeding.  Any finding of fact or law, judgment, determination, conclusion or final order made by the Administrator or an Appeal Tribunal, examiner, Board of Review, district court or any other person with the authority to make findings of fact or law pursuant to NRS 612.450 to 612.530, inclusive, is not admissible or binding in any separate or subsequent action or proceeding, between a person and that person’s present or previous employer brought before an arbitrator, court or judge of this State or the United States, regardless of whether the prior action was between the same or related parties or involved the same facts.

      (Added to NRS by 1987, 151; A 1993, 1832)

CONTRIBUTIONS

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1990–2019 · leading case: Dannenbring v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 907 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (D. Nev. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dannenbring v. Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, 907 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (D. Nev. 2013). · cites it 3× “NRS 612.533. Here, to the extent the court chooses to apply NRS 612.”
Bradshaw v. Golden Road Motor Inn, 885 F. Supp. 1370 (D. Nev. 1995). · cites it 3× “533 The parties also argue at length about the import of NRS 612.533, which provides, in relevant part, that “[a]ny finding of fact or law, judgment, determination, conclusion or final order” made pursuant to the state statutes on unemployment compensation is “not admissible or…”
Britton v. City of North Las Vegas, 799 P.2d 568 (Nev. 1990). “…of the district court. 1 Res judicata does not apply to factual determinations of the employment security department. NRS 612.533.”
Walker v. Charter Commc'ns LLC (D. Nev. 2019). “Defendant argues that such evidence is barred pursuant to NRS 612.533 and Bradshaw v. Golden Road Motor Inn, 885 F.”
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.