Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 613.210 (2026)

Blacklists unlawful; recommendations and statements to be provided employee by employer

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 613.210  Blacklists unlawful; recommendations and statements to be provided employee by employer.

      1.  As used in this section, “employee” means every person who has entered upon service or employment of an employer, and the employment shall be deemed to commence from the date of the entry or performance of any service. Any contract of employment, rule, regulation or device to the contrary is void.

      2.  A person shall not blacklist or cause to be blacklisted or publish the name of or cause to be published the name of any employee, mechanic or laborer discharged by that person with the intent to prevent that employee, mechanic or laborer from engaging in or securing similar or other employment from any other person.

      3.  If any officer or agent of any person blacklists or causes to be blacklisted or publishes the name of or causes to be published the name of any employee, mechanic or laborer discharged by that person with the intent to prevent that employee, mechanic or laborer from engaging in or securing similar or other employment from any other person in any manner conspires or contrives, by correspondence or otherwise, to prevent that discharged employee from procuring employment, the officer or agent, as applicable, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

      4.  Subsections 2 and 3 do not prohibit any person from giving in writing, at the time the employee leaves or is discharged from the service of the employer, a truthful statement of the reason for such leaving of the service or discharge of that employee, nor do subsections 2 and 3 prevent any employer from giving any employee or former employee any statement with reference to any meritorious services which the employee may have rendered to that employer. The employer shall supply statements as provided in this subsection upon demand from the employee, but no such statement is required unless the employee has been in service for a period of not less than 60 days. Only one such statement may be issued to that employee.

      [1911 C&P § 515; RL § 6780; NCL § 10462] + [1911 C&P § 516; RL § 6781; NCL § 10463] + [1911 C&P § 517; A 1915, 275; 1919 RL § 6782; NCL § 10464]—(NRS A 1967, 635; 1987, 1312)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1992–2023 · leading case: Minshew v. Donley, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (D. Nev. 2012).
Minshew v. Donley, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (D. Nev. 2012). · cites it 3× “Section 613.210(2) states: A person shall not blacklist or cause to be blacklisted or publish the name of or cause to be published the name of any employee, mechanic or laborer discharged by that person with the intent to prevent that employee, mechanic or laborer from engaging…”
Williams v. Nevada, 794 F. Supp. 1026 (D. Nev. 1992). · cites it 4× “Additionally, Williams has asserted a claim against Fischer for intentional infliction of emotional distress, for wrongful discharge, for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and for violating public policy by “blacklisting” him in violation of NRS § 613.210.…”
HD Supply Facilities Maint., Ltd. v. Bymoen, 210 P.3d 183 (Nev. 2009). · cites it 2× “In the 1995 amendments to NRS 613.210(4), the Legislature set public policy to govern creation and enforcement of restrictive covenants in contracts that apply to Nevada businesses with Nevada employees.”
Matthys v. Barrick Gold of North Am., Inc. (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 6× “330; (3) blacklisting in violation of NRS § 613.210; (4) 20 preventing plaintiff from obtaining new employment in violation of NRS § 613.”
Zeddies v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. (D. Nev. 2021). · cites it 3× “380;7 blacklisting under NRS 613.210; domestic violence under NRS 613.”
Whittemore v. Anderson Fin. Servs., LLC (D. Nev. 2020). · cites it 2× “200, (¶¶ 163–165); (7) Negligence Per Se in violation of NRS § 613.210, (¶¶ 166–168); 20 (8) Negligence Per Se in violation of NRS § 613.”
Tulipat v. Lombardo (D. Nev. 2021). · cites it 2× “13 The Ninth Circuit has held that NRS 613.210, “is a criminal statute that does not confer a private 14 right of action for blacklisting.”
Matthys v. Barrick Gold of North Am., Inc. (D. Nev. 2023). “330; (3) blacklisting in violation of NRS 7 § 613.210; (4) preventing him from obtaining new employment in violation of NRS § 613.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 613.210(2) — 1 case
Minshew v. Donley, 911 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (D. Nev. 2012). “Section 613.210(2) states: A person shall not blacklist or cause to be blacklisted or publish the name of or cause to be published the name of any employee, mechanic or laborer discharged by that person with the intent to prevent that employee, mechanic or laborer from engaging…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 613.210(4) — 1 case
HD Supply Facilities Maint., Ltd. v. Bymoen, 210 P.3d 183 (Nev. 2009). “In the 1995 amendments to NRS 613.210(4), the Legislature set public policy to govern creation and enforcement of restrictive covenants in contracts that apply to Nevada businesses with Nevada employees.”
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.