NRS 11.120

What constitutes adverse possession under written instrument or judgment

Applied in 6 court decisions — leading case Lanigir v. Arden (1966)

Most recently applied in 664 F. Supp. 2d 1174 - Dayton Valley Investors, LLC v. Union Pacific Railroad (October 2009)

[1911 CPA § 15; RL § 4957; NCL § 8514]

How often courts cite this section

citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

For the purpose of constituting adverse possession by any person claiming a title, founded upon a written instrument or judgment or decree, land shall be deemed to have been possessed and occupied in the following cases:

1. Where it has been usually cultivated or improved.

2. Where it has been protected by a substantial enclosure.

3. Where, though not enclosed, it has been used for the supply of fuel, or of fencing timber, for the purpose of husbandry; or for the use of pasturage, or for ordinary uses of the occupant.

4. Where a known farm or single lot has been partly improved, the portion of such farm or lot that may have been left not cleared, or not enclosed according to the usual course and custom of the adjoining country, shall be deemed to have been occupied for the same length of time as the part improved and cultivated.

Official source: Nevada Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Nevada statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.