Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 616B - INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE: INSURERS; LIABILITY FOR PROVISION OF COVERAGE
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603 (2026)

Independent enterprises

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 616B.603  Independent enterprises.

      1.  A person is not an employer for the purposes of chapters 616A to 616D, inclusive, of NRS if:

      (a) The person enters into a contract with another person or business which is an independent enterprise; and

      (b) The person is not in the same trade, business, profession or occupation as the independent enterprise.

      2.  As used in this section, “independent enterprise” means a person who holds himself or herself out as being engaged in a separate business and:

      (a) Holds a business or occupational license in his or her own name; or

      (b) Owns, rents or leases property used in furtherance of the business.

      3.  The provisions of this section do not apply to:

      (a) A principal contractor who is licensed pursuant to chapter 624 of NRS.

      (b) A real estate broker who has a broker-salesperson or salesperson associated with the real estate broker pursuant to NRS 645.520.

      4.  The Administrator may adopt such regulations as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this section.

      (Added to NRS by 1991, 2392; A 1995, 2136)—(Substituted in revision for NRS 616.262)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1997–2015 · leading case: Richards v. Repub. Silver State Disposal, Inc., 148 P.3d 684 (Nev. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Richards v. Repub. Silver State Disposal, Inc., 148 P.3d 684 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 42× “But a narrow exception to this umbrella-like coverage requirement applies to principal contractors that are not licensed under NRS Chapter 624, as set forth in NRS 616B.603. That statute provides that nonlicensed principal contractors are not statutory employers (only) when they…”
Harris v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 25 P.3d 206 (Nev. 2001). · cites it 28× “262 (re-codified as NRS 616B.603) manifested the Legislature's intent to codify the test enunciated in Meers v.”
Hays Home Delivery, Inc. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada, 31 P.3d 367 (Nev. 2001). · cites it 12× “Haughton Elevator 4 and codified in NRS 616B.603, determines whether independent contractors are “employees” under the NIIA.”
Ges, Inc. v. Corbitt, 21 P.3d 11 (Nev. 2001). · cites it 2× “Haughton Elevator 10 and now codified as NRS 616B.603(l)(b). 11 The “normal work test” is used in non-construction cases and in construction cases when the defendant is not a principal contractor 12 licensed under NRS chapter 624 or is not working pursuant to a construction…”
In Re Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., Emp. Practices Litig., 662 F. Supp. 2d 1069 (N.D. Ind. 2009). · cites it 3× “2d 1006, 1007 (1985), and codified in the Nevada Industrial Insurance Act, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 616B.603. *1098 Under that test, a principal is not an if employer if who he enters into a contract with an independent enterprise that is not in the same trade, business, profession or…”
Seput v. Lacayo, 134 P.3d 733 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 2× “Lacayo. *504 CONCLUSION We conclude that a person providing monthly pest control services falls within the domestic worker classification of NRS 616B.”
Lipps v. S. Nevada Paving, 998 P.2d 1183 (Nev. 2000). · cites it 3× “262 (recodified as NRS 616B.603), which provides in part: 1.”
Tucker v. Action Equip. & Scaffold Co., 951 P.2d 1027 (Nev. 1997). “262 (recodified as NRS 616B.603), which provided in part: 1.”
State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Ortega Concrete Pumping, Inc., 951 P.2d 1033 (Nev. 1997). · cites it 2× “” 4 CONCLUSION The district court must consider the motion for summary judgment in light of the “normal work test” codified at NRS 616B.603 and determine whether there are issues of fact to be resolved at trial.”
In Re Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., Emp. Practices Litig., 758 F. Supp. 2d 638 (N.D. Ind. 2010). “A limited scope of employers of independent contractors are excluded from the provisions of Chapters 616A through 616D — a person isn’t a statutory employer if (a) the person enters into a contract with another person or business that is an independent enterprise and (b) the…”
Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada v. United States, 322 F. Supp. 2d 1116 (D. Nev. 2004). · cites it 2× “” Nev.Rev.Stat. § 616B.603(1). If this exception does not apply, “subcontractors, independent contractors, and the employees of either shall be deemed to be employees of the principal contractor.”
D & D Tire Vs. Ouellette, 2015 NV 47 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 8× “" See NRS 616B.603(1)(b); Hays Home Delivery, Inc.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(1) — 7 cases
Harris v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 25 P.3d 206 (Nev. 2001). “262 (re-codified as NRS 616B.603) manifested the Legislature's intent to codify the test enunciated in Meers v.”
Richards v. Repub. Silver State Disposal, Inc., 148 P.3d 684 (Nev. 2006). “But a narrow exception to this umbrella-like coverage requirement applies to principal contractors that are not licensed under NRS Chapter 624, as set forth in NRS 616B.603. That statute provides that nonlicensed principal contractors are not statutory employers (only) when they…”
In Re Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., Emp. Practices Litig., 662 F. Supp. 2d 1069 (N.D. Ind. 2009). “2d 1006, 1007 (1985), and codified in the Nevada Industrial Insurance Act, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 616B.603. *1098 Under that test, a principal is not an if employer if who he enters into a contract with an independent enterprise that is not in the same trade, business, profession or…”
Seput v. Lacayo, 134 P.3d 733 (Nev. 2006). “Lacayo. *504 CONCLUSION We conclude that a person providing monthly pest control services falls within the domestic worker classification of NRS 616B.”
Hays Home Delivery, Inc. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada, 31 P.3d 367 (Nev. 2001). “Haughton Elevator 4 and codified in NRS 616B.603, determines whether independent contractors are “employees” under the NIIA.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(1)(b) — 1 case
State Indus. Ins. Sys. v. Ortega Concrete Pumping, Inc., 951 P.2d 1033 (Nev. 1997). “” 4 CONCLUSION The district court must consider the motion for summary judgment in light of the “normal work test” codified at NRS 616B.603 and determine whether there are issues of fact to be resolved at trial.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(2) — 2 cases
Harris v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 25 P.3d 206 (Nev. 2001). “262 (re-codified as NRS 616B.603) manifested the Legislature's intent to codify the test enunciated in Meers v.”
Hays Home Delivery, Inc. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada, 31 P.3d 367 (Nev. 2001). “Haughton Elevator 4 and codified in NRS 616B.603, determines whether independent contractors are “employees” under the NIIA.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(3) — 2 cases
Harris v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 25 P.3d 206 (Nev. 2001). “262 (re-codified as NRS 616B.603) manifested the Legislature's intent to codify the test enunciated in Meers v.”
Lipps v. S. Nevada Paving, 998 P.2d 1183 (Nev. 2000). “262 (recodified as NRS 616B.603), which provides in part: 1.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(3)(a) — 2 cases
Richards v. Repub. Silver State Disposal, Inc., 148 P.3d 684 (Nev. 2006). “But a narrow exception to this umbrella-like coverage requirement applies to principal contractors that are not licensed under NRS Chapter 624, as set forth in NRS 616B.603. That statute provides that nonlicensed principal contractors are not statutory employers (only) when they…”
Harris v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 25 P.3d 206 (Nev. 2001). “262 (re-codified as NRS 616B.603) manifested the Legislature's intent to codify the test enunciated in Meers v.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 616B.603(l)(b) — 2 cases
Ges, Inc. v. Corbitt, 21 P.3d 11 (Nev. 2001). “Haughton Elevator 10 and now codified as NRS 616B.603(l)(b). 11 The “normal work test” is used in non-construction cases and in construction cases when the defendant is not a principal contractor 12 licensed under NRS chapter 624 or is not working pursuant to a construction…”
Hays Home Delivery, Inc. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Nevada, 31 P.3d 367 (Nev. 2001). “Haughton Elevator 4 and codified in NRS 616B.603, determines whether independent contractors are “employees” under the NIIA.”
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.