Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 630 - PHYSICIANS, PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS, MEDICAL ASSISTANTS, PERFUSIONISTS, ANESTHESIOLOGIST ASSISTANTS AND PRACTITIONERS OF RESPIRATORY CARE
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.356 (2026)

Judicial review; effective date of order

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 630.356  Judicial review; effective date of order.

      1.  Any person aggrieved by a final order of the Board is entitled to judicial review of the Board’s order.

      2.  Every order that imposes a sanction against a licensee pursuant to subsection 4 or 5 of NRS 630.352 or any regulation of the Board is effective from the date the Secretary-Treasurer certifies the order until the date the order is modified or reversed by a final judgment of the court.

      3.  The district court shall give a petition for judicial review of the Board’s order priority over other civil matters which are not expressly given priority by law.

      (Added to NRS by 1977, 827; A 1979, 957; 1985, 2244; 2001, 771; 2009, 2972; 2025, 1631)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2012–2015 · leading case: Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Med. Examiners, 678 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Med. Examiners, 678 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Buckwalter raises two arguments that errors of judgment in the Board Members’ exercise of the summary suspension authority are insufficiently correctable. First, he points out that summary suspension proceedings and postdeprivation hearings involve different questions.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 20× “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). · cites it 10× “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
Kevin Buckwalter v. State of Nevada Bd. (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “Buckwalter raises two arguments that errors of judgment in the Board Members’ exercise of the summary suspension authority are insufficiently correctable.”
Chudacoff v. Univ. Med. Ctr., 954 F. Supp. 2d 1065 (D. Nev. 2013). · cites it 2× “Nev.Rev.Stat. § 630.356; Mishler, 191 F.3d at 1005, n.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.356(1) — 3 cases
Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Med. Examiners, 678 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2012). “Buckwalter raises two arguments that errors of judgment in the Board Members’ exercise of the summary suspension authority are insufficiently correctable. First, he points out that summary suspension proceedings and postdeprivation hearings involve different questions.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 630.356(2) — 3 cases
Buckwalter v. Nevada Bd. of Med. Examiners, 678 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 2012). “Buckwalter raises two arguments that errors of judgment in the Board Members’ exercise of the summary suspension authority are insufficiently correctable. First, he points out that summary suspension proceedings and postdeprivation hearings involve different questions.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
Tate, Jr., M.D. Vs. Nev. State Bd. Med. Exam'r, 2015 NV 67 (Nev. 2015). “In an administrative proceeding before the Board of Medical Examiners, a physician has the right to seek judicial review of a final order pursuant to NRS 630.356, which states in pertinent part as follows: 1.”
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.