Nevada Tort Laws

Within the civil law framework, individuals have an unspoken social contract, bound to treat one another with fairness and care. This duty compels them to act with diligence and avoid causing harm to others. However, as history and daily experience attest, this ideal is not always met. Instances arise where individuals, through intentional or negligent conduct, inflict harm upon others. These give rise to torts in Nevada, defined as civil wrongs that warrant claims for damages.

For the injured party, a cause of action emerges, granting them the right to seek legal redress from the party responsible, known as the tortfeasor. The primary objective of tort law is to remedy the wrong committed, typically through damages, a monetary sum the court calculates to compensate the plaintiff for the harm suffered.

While tort cases may not represent the most frequent type of litigation encountered within state civil courts, their impact on individuals can be profound. According to national statistics, they constitute 8% of all non-criminal matters heard in district courts. However, this seemingly low percentage belies the potential life-altering consequences of torts, which can include incidents such as car crashes, animal attacks, and other scenarios.

Therefore, it is prudent to maintain a basic understanding of tort law, even if the likelihood of encountering such situations remains relatively low. By acknowledging the potential for harm and the legal framework designed to address it, individuals can be better equipped to seek appropriate remedies when necessary.

Basic Tort Categories in Nevada

Negligent Torts

Negligence torts comprise civil wrongs arising from the failure to exercise reasonable care, thus causing injury to another party. These claims hold individuals and corporations accountable for actions or omissions that fall short of the standard expected from a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances.

The essential elements of a negligent tort can be summarized as follows:

• Duty of care: The defendant owed a legal duty to the plaintiff to act with reasonable care. This duty arises from various relationships and circumstances, such as driver-pedestrian interactions or property owner-visitor relationships.

• Breach of duty: The defendant breached this duty by failing to act with the required degree of care. This may involve active conduct, such as texting while driving, or inaction, such as neglecting to maintain safe conditions on premises.

• Causation: The defendant's breach of duty must have caused the plaintiff's injury. This requires establishing a direct and proximate causal link between the breach and the resulting harm.

• Damages: The plaintiff suffered an actual injury or loss, such as physical or emotional harm, property damage, or financial loss, which can be compensated through legal remedies. 

Common examples of negligent torts include:

• Traffic accidents: A driver texting while driving collides with another vehicle, causing injury or property damage.

• Premises liability: A store owner fails to clean up a spilled liquid, causing a shopper to slip and fall and have a physical injury.

• Medical malpractice: A healthcare provider deviates from the accepted standard of care, leading to patient harm.

Intentional Torts

In civil law, intentional torts refer to wrongful acts committed knowingly and deliberately by the defendant. The crux of determining an intentional tort lies not in the resulting harm but in the perpetrator's intent at the time of the act. This means that even if the consequences exceed the intended outcome, the nature of the tort remains intentional rather than negligent.

To illustrate, consider a seemingly harmless prank played on a colleague involving placing marbles on the floor to cause a minor stumble. If the unsuspecting colleague falls unexpectedly and suffers a significant injury, the act, despite the unintended severity of the harm, constitutes an intentional tort (battery) due to the deliberate act of placing the obstacle.

Strict Liability Torts

Strict liability torts differ significantly from negligence-based torts in that liability is established without demonstrating the defendant’s fault. Instead, the mere occurrence of a specific act and subsequent damage to the plaintiff suffices for liability to attach. This legal framework prioritizes preventative measures against harm, regardless of intent or negligence.

Product liability cases epitomize this principle. In such instances, the law focuses on the potential for serious societal harm caused by defective or unreasonably dangerous products, even if manufacturers or sellers did not intentionally seek to cause harm. To mitigate such risks, courts may resort to injunctive relief, prohibiting specific actions, or award damages to compensate the injured plaintiff. These remedies will be discussed in detail later.

Other Tort Categories in Nevada

Nevada law recognizes business or economic torts, encompassing harmful conduct that causes financial losses by damaging intangible assets. One prominent example is interference with contractual relations, where a party intentionally induces another to breach or abandon a contract with a third party. This act disrupts the intangible asset of trust and reliance built between the original contracting parties.

Nuisance is another significant concept in Nevada tort law, categorized into four distinct types. However, these can be effectively grouped into two primary categories:

• Activities demonstrably detrimental to health, offensive to the senses, or indecent: This encompasses nuisances that significantly impair the comfortable use and enjoyment of life or property by causing physical or emotional discomfort.

• Properties or sites utilized in association with illegal drugs or criminal enterprises: This category recognizes the inherent harm such locations pose to the surrounding community and public safety.

Remedies for nuisances typically involve legal actions seeking abatement, which compels the responsible party to cease the objectionable activity and restore the property to its non-nuisance state. Seeking legal counsel is ideal, especially when the nuisance involves criminal activity or drug operations.

Torts vs. Crimes in Nevada

Torts and crimes similarly seek to address the despicable behavior of society members, imposing accountability and restitution to maintain order. But they differ considerably in other aspects:

Note that torts and crimes can coincide. For example, speeding is a criminal act, but if the driver was also texting behind the wheel, there is also negligence under civil law. That said, the criminal and civil cases will be filed and pursued separately.

Mass Torts in Nevada

In Nevada, mass torts unite individuals with similar injuries caused by a single entity. These combined claims, though distinct in specifics, share a common source, leading to a consolidated lawsuit known as multi-district litigation.

While awards vary based on individual circumstances, mass torts excel in cases with widespread harm, like defective products, toxic exposure, or large-scale accidents. Pursuing individual suits in such situations would be cumbersome and inefficient. Mass torts offer a more streamlined path to resolution, benefiting both plaintiffs and the judicial system.

Furthermore, plaintiffs gain a stronger bargaining position by pooling resources and facing a powerful defendant collectively. This enables them to pursue their claims effectively.

Mass Torts vs. Class Actions

Mass torts and class actions are very similar in that multiple parties come together to sue a single defendant. The parties’ resources and time are pooled in either case against a defendant. But there are notable differences between the two:

Class actions differ chiefly in that all the parties are treated as a single entity; thus, the representative's loss means that everyone represented also loses. For mass actions, this is not the case. Since each case remains technically separate, some claimants can win while others lose.

The Mass Tort Process

Joining a mass tort lawsuit requires careful consideration and navigation. While legal resources can provide initial guidance, working with an experienced lawyer is beneficial. They will assess the claim's suitability for inclusion in the existing litigation by evaluating the claimant's injuries and comparing them to those of other plaintiffs.

Establishing sufficient similarity in harm sustained is vital. If the dissimilarities outweigh the similarities, individual lawsuits may be necessary. Assuming sufficient alignment is established, the lawyer will file the complaint with the court. Typically, individual lawsuits within a mass tort are scattered across district courts. However, MDL allows consolidation under a single judge, reducing duplication of effort.

Before a full-blown trial for all plaintiffs, the court may select a few representative cases, known as bellwethers, for trial. These serve as a microcosm of the broader litigation, offering valuable insights into the potential outcomes for the remaining cases and influencing potential settlement negotiations.

Mass Torts Tort Liability Insurance Requirements

At the most basic, tort liability insurance covers the operation of vehicles, especially cars. Private individuals are required to carry insurance with the following limits:

• $25,000 for bodily injury or death to one person in a crash.

• $50,000 for bodily injury or death to two or more persons in a single crash.

• $20,000 for property damage in a single crash.

The insurance limits for buses and vehicles that transport passengers for money are much higher, set at $5 million due to the heightened potential for harm. Trucks are also required to have special liability coverage for hazardous materials.

The Statute of Limitations for Tort Cases in Nevada

The time one has to join a mass tort suit in Nevada depends on what the case is and when the harm was either sustained or discovered, whichever comes later. Generally, these are the statutes of limitations for tort cases in the state:

If the injured party is a minor child, the statute of limitations is paused until the victim turns 18. 

The statute of limitations is another reason why consulting a lawyer is advisable. There are separate rules based on the cause of action the party wishes to use. Some exceptions and tolling rules may also extend the deadline. 

How Much Can Someone Sue in a Tort Case in Nevada?

Due to tort reform, there are limits to the monetary award, known as damages, a plaintiff may receive. For instance, when suing public employees, damages are capped at $200,000. For medical malpractice matters, non-economic damages are limited to $350,000. Meanwhile, punitive damages are limited to thrice the amount of compensatory damages or $300,000 if the compensatory damages are less than $100,000. This cap will not apply if the defendant is:

• The distributor, seller, or manufacturer of a defective product.

• Someone accused of defamation.

• An insurer who acts in bad faith.

• A violator of state or federal laws against discriminatory housing practices.

• Someone sued over the harm caused by hazardous materials.

Financial reparations for a tort aim to compensate the plaintiff for the harm they have endured. Understanding the various types of damages available is crucial for anyone navigating a tort case.

• Economic damages: Tangible and quantifiable losses directly attributable to the defendant's wrongdoing, readily supported by documentation such as receipts and bills. Examples include:

• Medical expenses: Costs associated with treatment, medication, and ongoing care related to the injury.

• Lost wages: Income lost due to missed work or reduced earning capacity.

• Property damage: Repair or replacement costs for damaged belongings.

• Future costs: Projected expenses for ongoing medical needs or lost future earnings.

• Non-economic damages: Intangible and subjective losses representing the emotional and psychological impact of the injury. These are more challenging to quantify but are nevertheless compensable. Examples include:

• Pain and suffering: Physical and emotional distress caused by the injury.

• Loss of enjoyment of life: Inability to participate in activities previously enjoyed due to the injury.

• Disfigurement: Permanent physical scarring or alterations.

• Anxiety and emotional distress: Mental health impacts like fear, depression, or PTSD.

• Punitive damages: In exceptional cases of intentional wrongdoing or reckless conduct, Nevada courts may award punitive damages. These are not intended to compensate the plaintiff but to serve as a financial sanction against the defendant and deter similar conduct. They are typically awarded in addition to compensatory and non-economic damages.

Note that Nevada follows modified comparative negligence rules, where a plaintiff may be partly at fault for the harm sustained but still recover proportionally reduced amounts as long as the share in the blame is less than the defendant’s.

Other Legal Remedies in Tort Cases in Nevada

In Nevada mass tort cases, the need for immediate action can arise while litigation progresses. This section explores two crucial remedies that empower plaintiffs to seek interim relief when urgent concerns warrant swift intervention.

Preliminary Injunctions

An interlocutory injunction, granted mid-litigation, allows the court to halt the defendant's ongoing actions that potentially inflict further harm on the plaintiffs. This potent remedy requires proper notice and a hearing with the defendant, affording both parties due process. If the plaintiff prevails in the final litigation, the injunction becomes permanent, ensuring continued protection.

Temporary Restraining Orders

In cases of extreme urgency, Nevada courts may grant a temporary restraining order without prior notice to the defendant. This swift remedy empowers the court to immediately stop the defendant's actions for a limited period, typically 14 days. However, the lack of prior notice necessitates a subsequent hearing within the 14-day timeframe, where the plaintiff must formally seek a preliminary injunction. This grants the defendant the opportunity to be heard. Notably, the plaintiff must post a bond when requesting a TRO.

Restitution

Nevada law recognizes the remedy of restitution. This applies in cases where the defendant has unjustly enriched themselves at the expense of another. Unlike damages, which seek to compensate the plaintiff for losses, restitution focuses on returning the defendant's ill-gotten gains. It is calculated based on the demonstrable value of the unjust enrichment, not necessarily the plaintiff's specific losses.

Resources for Tort Victims in  Nevada

State Bar of Nevada Lawyer Referral Service

The State Bar of Nevada maintains a lawyer referral service for those who wish to connect with an attorney who can represent them in various cases. It will refer the client to a lawyer for a consultation, and there is no immediate obligation to retain the lawyer after initial talks. Afterward, a staff member will select a qualified attorney based on the plaintiff's needs. There is an online option for those who prefer a web-based portal. Just note that the initial consultation has a nominal fee. The service is reachable at 702-382-0504 or 800-789-5747.

Mesothelioma.com

Mesothelioma.com is a resource for those who have suffered harm due to asbestos exposure all over the country. Lung infections are a common outcome of these toxic torts, so many attorneys take on mass tort cases arising from these incidents. The website is limited to victims of this exposure and lists the names of law firms that may help plaintiffs seek compensation. The organization can be reached at 1-800-336-0086.