Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 87.150 (2026)

Nature of partner’s liability

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 87.150  Nature of partner’s liability.

      1.  Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, all partners are liable:

      (a) Jointly and severally for everything chargeable to the partnership under NRS 87.130 and 87.140.

      (b) Jointly for all other debts and obligations of the partnership; but any partner may enter into a separate obligation to perform a partnership contract.

      2.  Subject to subsection 3, a partner in a registered limited-liability partnership is not liable directly or indirectly, by way of indemnification, contribution, assessment or otherwise, for debts, obligations or liabilities of or chargeable to the partnership, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, arising from omissions, negligence, wrongful acts, misconduct or malpractice committed while the partnership is a registered limited-liability partnership and in the course of the partnership business by another partner or an employee, agent or representative of the partnership.

      3.  Subsection 2 does not affect the liability of a partner in a registered limited-liability partnership for his or her own omissions, negligence, wrongful acts, misconduct or malpractice or that of any person under his or her direct supervision and control.

      4.  A partner in a registered limited-liability partnership is not a proper party to a proceeding by or against the registered limited-liability partnership, the object of which is to recover damages or enforce the obligations arising out of the acts, omissions, malpractice or misconduct of the type described in subsection 2 unless the partner is personally liable under subsection 3.

      [15:74:1931; 1931 NCL § 5028.14]—(NRS A 1995, 1471)

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1969–2025 · leading case: Henderson v. Buchanan (In Re W. World Funding, Inc.), 52 B.R. 743 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1985).
Henderson v. Buchanan (In Re W. World Funding, Inc.), 52 B.R. 743 (Bankr. D. Nev. 1985). · cites it 2× “Uniform Partnership Act, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 87.150. This latter doctrine has been incorporated into the Bankruptcy Code at § 723(a).”
Radaker v. Scott, 855 P.2d 1037 (Nev. 1993). · cites it 2× “See NRS 87.150. The parties’ intent to create a joint venture is determined by the application of ordinary rules concerning the interpretation and construction of contracts as well as a consideration of the actions and conduct of the parties.”
Diamond Nat'l Corp. v. Thunderbird Hotel, Inc., 454 P.2d 13 (Nev. 1969). · cites it 5× “*274 NRS 87.150 1 and NRS 14.060 2 read together are clearly dispositive of this case.”
Haertel ex rel. Borregard ex rel. Borregard v. Sonshine Carpet Co., 757 P.2d 364 (Nev. 1988). · cites it 2× “Furthermore, consonant with the principle of shared liability of joint venturers for their acts (see NRS 87.150, 87.130), we conclude that it is likewise equitable that, where a joint venturer has paid premiums for workmen’s compensation to protect itself against loss, the…”
Watson v. G.C. Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 691 P.2d 417 (Nev. 1984). “” NRS 87.150(1). To hold the partnership liable in this case would, therefore, necessarily be to hold the partners liable as well, despite the policy of the NIIA.”
Trs. of the Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen Local No. 3 Health & Welfare Trust v. Reynolds Elec. & Eng'g Co., 747 F. Supp. 606 (D. Nev. 1990). “”; (5) “This letter is not intended to limit the indemnity agreements that we have .”
Hotel Cont'l v. Comm'r, 70 T.C.M. 295 (Tax Ct. 1995). · cites it 2× “Prior to the settlement agreement, petitioner had a right to take action against Levy, the other general partner in Indian Springs.”
Darrough v. SOC LLC (D. Nev. 2025). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs also reiterate that SOC- 21 SMG and Day & Zimmerman are joint venturers under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 87.150 and so “while 22 [SOC-SMG and Day & Zimmerman] might be members of SOC LLC and would generally be 23 shielded from liability, because they are joint venturers in the…”
DeFiore v. SOC LLC (D. Nev. 2025). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs also reiterate that SOC- 21 SMG and Day & Zimmerman are joint venturers under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 87.150 and so “while 22 [SOC-SMG and Day & Zimmerman] might be members of SOC LLC and would generally be 23 shielded from liability, because they are joint venturers in the…”
In re Cay Clubs, 2014 NV 14 (Nev. 2014). · cites it 2× “130; NRS 87.150(1). This liability extends to tortious acts such as fraud.”
In re Cay Clubs, 2014 NV 92 (Nev. 2014). “In a partnership, the partners are jointly and severally liable for injuries caused by a partner's actions within the ordinary course of the partnership's business or with the authority of other partners.”
Mt. Wheeler Power, Inc. v. Gallagher, 653 P.2d 1212 (Nev. 1982). “NRS 87.150. 4 When concerned with a Chapter XII proceeding, the provisions of Chapter XII will control over conflicting provisions found elsewhere in the bankruptcy act.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 87.150(1) — 4 cases
Watson v. G.C. Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 691 P.2d 417 (Nev. 1984). “” NRS 87.150(1). To hold the partnership liable in this case would, therefore, necessarily be to hold the partners liable as well, despite the policy of the NIIA.”
Haertel ex rel. Borregard ex rel. Borregard v. Sonshine Carpet Co., 757 P.2d 364 (Nev. 1988). “Furthermore, consonant with the principle of shared liability of joint venturers for their acts (see NRS 87.150, 87.130), we conclude that it is likewise equitable that, where a joint venturer has paid premiums for workmen’s compensation to protect itself against loss, the…”
In re Cay Clubs, 2014 NV 14 (Nev. 2014). “130; NRS 87.150(1). This liability extends to tortious acts such as fraud.”
In re Cay Clubs, 2014 NV 92 (Nev. 2014). “In a partnership, the partners are jointly and severally liable for injuries caused by a partner's actions within the ordinary course of the partnership's business or with the authority of other partners.”
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.