Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 686A.020 (2026)
Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices prohibited
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 686A.020 Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or
practices prohibited. A person
shall not engage in this state in any practice which is defined in NRS 686A.010 to 686A.310, inclusive, as, or determined
pursuant to NRS 686A.170 to be, an
unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the
business of insurance.
(Added to NRS by 1971, 1688; A 1975, 1287; 1977, 432; 2025, 2050)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Big-D Constr. Corp. v. Take it for Granite Too, 917 F. Supp. 2d 1096 (D. Nev. 2013).
Big-D Constr. Corp. v. Take it for Granite Too, 917 F. Supp. 2d 1096 (D. Nev. 2013). “Big-D argues Nautilus delayed in responding to the claim, failed to obtain any experts or investigate, failed to affirm or deny coverage for over a year, failed to effect settlement, caused Big-D to file suit due to the lack of a coverage decision, and failed to provide an…”
Albert H. Wohlers & Co. v. Bartgis, 969 P.2d 949 (Nev. 1999). “In the alternative, Bartgis asserts that NRS 686A.020 brings Wohlers within the ambit of liability under NRS 686A.”
Pioneer Chlor Alkali Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins., 863 F. Supp. 1237 (D. Nev. 1994). “National Union asserts that Chapter 686A of the Nevada Revised Statutes does not apply to its handling of Pioneer’s claim because National Union did not engage in a practice “in this state [Nevada],” NRS 686A.020. National Union cites no authority supporting its interpretation…”
Ainsworth v. Combined Ins. Co. of Am., 763 P.2d 673 (Nev. 1988). “See NRS 686A.020; 686A.030(1); 686A.040; 686A.”
CP Food & Beverage, Inc. v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 324 F. Supp. 3d 1172 (D. Nev. 2018). “Unfair Claims Practices Nevada Revised Statutes § 686A.020 provides that an insurer "shall not engage in this state in any practice which is .”
Contreras v. Taylor (D. Nev. 2025). “Yet even construing 14 these arguments liberally1 in Contreras’s favor, his allegations are insufficient to give rise to 15 viable claims against the defendants, much less establish how this court has jurisdiction over 16 any alleged claims under the state statutes.”
Eden Treatment, LLC v. Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Nevada (D. Nev. 2025). “Plaintiffs are bringing multiple claims 24 against all Defendants, including claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied duty of good 25 faith and fair dealing, violation of NRS 686A.020 and 686A.310, violation of Nevada’s prompt 26 payment statutes, and declaratory…”
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.