Nevada Revised Statutes
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 7.275 (2026)
Continuation as public corporation; powers; rules of Supreme Court
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NRSleg.state.nv.us (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 7.275 Continuation as public corporation; powers; rules of Supreme
Court.
1. The State Bar of Nevada, a public corporation heretofore created by statute, is hereby continued under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the Supreme Court.
2. The State Bar of Nevada has perpetual succession and a seal and it may sue and be sued. It may, for the purpose of carrying into effect and promoting its objectives:
(a) Make contracts.
(b) Own, hold, use, manage and deal in and with real and personal property.
(c) Do all other acts incidental to the foregoing or necessary or expedient for the administration of its affairs and the attainment of its purposes.
3. Rules for the government of the State Bar of Nevada shall be made by the Supreme Court pursuant to NRS 2.120.
(Added to NRS by 1963, 385)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2021 · leading case: In Re: Discipline of Christopher R. Arabia, 2021 NV 59 (Nev. 2021).
In Re: Discipline of Christopher R. Arabia, 2021 NV 59 (Nev. 2021). “223(1) (affording the family court "original, exclusive jurisdiction" over certain identified proceedings); NRS 7.275(1) (providing that the State Bar of Nevada is "under the exclusive jurisdiction" of the Nevada Supreme Court); NRS 32.”
Matter of Discipline of Droz, 160 P.3d 881 (Nev. 2007). “Authority to admit to practice and to discipline is inherent and exclusive in the courts.”
Louis v. Supreme Court of Nevada, 490 F. Supp. 1174 (D. Nev. 1980). “NRS 7.275(1); NRS 2.120. Since said State Bar can only make recommendations to the Supreme Court, no effective order can be entered against the State Bar to afford the plaintiff the relief she seeks.”
Whitehead v. Nevada Comm'n on Jud. Discipline, 878 P.2d 913 (Nev. 1994). “6, § 21 (constitutional referendum creating Judicial Discipline Commission) with NRS 7.275 (statute continuing state bar as a public corporation under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the supreme court) and SCR 99 and 103 (Supreme Court Rule creating state bar…”
State, Off. of the Attorney Gen. v. State Bar of Nevada (Nev. 2017). “ORDER GRANTING PETITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus seeks an order directing the State Bar of Nevada to extend the certification of limited practice under SCR 49.8 previously issued to petitioner Joseph Tartakovsky until he can be admitted to the Nevada State…”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 7.275(1) — 4 cases
In Re: Discipline of Christopher R. Arabia, 2021 NV 59 (Nev. 2021). “223(1) (affording the family court "original, exclusive jurisdiction" over certain identified proceedings); NRS 7.275(1) (providing that the State Bar of Nevada is "under the exclusive jurisdiction" of the Nevada Supreme Court); NRS 32.”
Matter of Discipline of Droz, 160 P.3d 881 (Nev. 2007). “Authority to admit to practice and to discipline is inherent and exclusive in the courts.”
Louis v. Supreme Court of Nevada, 490 F. Supp. 1174 (D. Nev. 1980). “NRS 7.275(1); NRS 2.120. Since said State Bar can only make recommendations to the Supreme Court, no effective order can be entered against the State Bar to afford the plaintiff the relief she seeks.”
State, Off. of the Attorney Gen. v. State Bar of Nevada (Nev. 2017). “ORDER GRANTING PETITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus seeks an order directing the State Bar of Nevada to extend the certification of limited practice under SCR 49.8 previously issued to petitioner Joseph Tartakovsky until he can be admitted to the Nevada State…”
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.