Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 719 - ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS (UNIFORM ACT)
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 719.260 (2026)

Attribution and effect of electronic record and electronic signature

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 719.260  Attribution and effect of electronic record and electronic signature.

      1.  An electronic record or electronic signature is attributable to a person if it was the act of the person. The act of the person may be shown in any manner, including a showing of the efficacy of any security procedure applied to determine the person to whom the electronic record or electronic signature was attributable.

      2.  The effect of an electronic record or electronic signature attributed to a person under subsection 1 is determined from the context and surrounding circumstances at the time of its creation, execution or adoption, including the parties’ agreement, if any, and otherwise as provided by law.

      (Added to NRS by 2001, 2717)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2021–2025 · leading case: Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Indus. Inc. (D. Nev. 2023).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jenkins-Naudain v. ABM Indus. Inc. (D. Nev. 2023). · cites it 2× “”); 4 Nev. Rev. Stat. § 719.260 (“An electronic record or electronic signature is attributable to a person 5 if it was the act of the person.”
Alejandro Romero v. Watkins & Shepard Trucking Inc (9th Cir. 2021). “9 (a); Nev. Rev. Stat. § 719.260 (1). When Romero logged onto Watkins’ online portal and clicked “I Agree” to the Arbitration Policy, he affirmed that his response was “true and accurate” and would “constitute [his] electronic signature which shall be enforceable” as if signed…”
Mitchell v. Vets. All., LLC (D. Nev. 2025). “§ 719.260(1)). 1 Courts have compelled arbitration where the declarations provided detailed 2 information explaining how the employee signed an arbitration agreement and 3 how defendant can ascertain that the signature was an act of the plaintiff’s.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 719.260(1) — 1 case
Mitchell v. Vets. All., LLC (D. Nev. 2025). “§ 719.260(1)). 1 Courts have compelled arbitration where the declarations provided detailed 2 information explaining how the employee signed an arbitration agreement and 3 how defendant can ascertain that the signature was an act of the plaintiff’s.”
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.