Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.033 (2026)

Default of employer does not relieve insurer from liability; effect of statements contained in application for policy; notification of employer of cancellation of policy; defense based on act or omission of insured employer may not be raised by insurer against claimant; insurer placed in position of employer under certain circumstances

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 616B.033  Default of employer does not relieve insurer from liability; effect of statements contained in application for policy; notification of employer of cancellation of policy; defense based on act or omission of insured employer may not be raised by insurer against claimant; insurer placed in position of employer under certain circumstances.

      1.  Every policy of insurance issued pursuant to chapters 616A to 617, inclusive, of NRS must contain a provision for the requirements of subsection 5 and a provision that insolvency or bankruptcy of the employer or the employer’s estate, or discharge therein, or any default of the employer does not relieve the insurer from liability for compensation resulting from an injury otherwise covered under the policy issued by the insurer.

      2.  No statement in an employer’s application for a policy of industrial insurance voids the policy as between the insurer and employer unless the statement is false and would have materially affected the acceptance of the risk if known by the insurer, but in no case does the invalidation of a policy as between the insurer and employer affect the insurer’s obligation to provide compensation to claimants arising before the cancellation of the policy. If the insurer is required pursuant to this subsection to provide compensation under an invalid policy, the insurer is subrogated to the claimant’s rights against the employer.

      3.  If an insurer intends to cancel a policy of insurance issued by the insurer pursuant to chapters 616A to 617, inclusive, of NRS, the insurer must give notice to that effect in writing to the employer fixing the date on which it is proposed that the cancellation becomes effective, which must be at least 30 days after the date on which the notice is personally delivered or mailed to the employer, except in the case of cancellation for failure to pay a premium when due. The notices must comply with the provisions of NRS 687B.310 to 687B.355, inclusive, and must be served personally on or sent by first-class mail or electronic transmission to the employer. If the employer has secured insurance with another insurer which would cause double coverage, the cancellation must be made effective as of the effective date of the other insurance.

      4.  As between any claimant and the insurer, no defense based on any act or omission of the insured employer, if different from the insurer, may be raised by the insurer.

      5.  For the purposes of chapters 616A to 617, inclusive, of NRS, as between the employee and the insurer:

      (a) Except as otherwise provided in NRS 616C.065, notice or knowledge of the injury to or by the employer is notice or knowledge to or by the insurer;

      (b) Jurisdiction over the employer is jurisdiction over the insurer; and

      (c) The insurer is bound by and subject to any judgments, findings of fact, conclusions of law, awards, decrees, orders or decisions rendered against the employer in the same manner and to the same extent as the employer.

      (Added to NRS by 1995, 2001; A 1997, 1427; 1999, 444; 2001, 802)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2006–2019 · leading case: Star Ins. Co. v. Neighbors, 138 P.3d 507 (Nev. 2006).
Star Ins. Co. v. Neighbors, 138 P.3d 507 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 13× “We hold that the fraud in this instance voids the retroactive coverage from its inception and that NRS 616B.033, governing rights as between workers’ compensation insurers and the injured employees, does not negate a fraud *775 defense as asserted by the insurer below.”
Buma Vs. Providence Corp. Dev., 2019 NV 60 (Nev. 2019). · cites it 2× “3d at 512 (relying on Larson's in interpreting NRS 616B.033(2)); Heidtman, 78 Nev. at 32, 368 P.”
Nev. Dept. of Corr. Vs. York Claims Serv's, Inc., 2015 NV 25 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 2× “See NRS 616B.033. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 (0) 1947A en”
United States v. Simpson (6th Cir. 2008). “1957); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.033(2); Am. Millennium Ins.”
Nev. Dept. of Corr. Vs. York Claims Serv's, Inc., 2015 NV 25 (Nev. 2015). “See NRS 616B.033. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 10 (0) 1947A en”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.033(2) — 3 cases
Star Ins. Co. v. Neighbors, 138 P.3d 507 (Nev. 2006). “We hold that the fraud in this instance voids the retroactive coverage from its inception and that NRS 616B.033, governing rights as between workers’ compensation insurers and the injured employees, does not negate a fraud *775 defense as asserted by the insurer below.”
Buma Vs. Providence Corp. Dev., 2019 NV 60 (Nev. 2019). “3d at 512 (relying on Larson's in interpreting NRS 616B.033(2)); Heidtman, 78 Nev. at 32, 368 P.”
United States v. Simpson (6th Cir. 2008). “1957); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.033(2); Am. Millennium Ins.”
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.