There is one form of action—the civil action.
Rule 2.One form of action
Group I: Scope of Rules; Form of Action · Last amended March 1, 2019 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 2 replaces the old split between actions at law and suits in equity with a single form of proceeding — the civil action — for every civil claim filed in Nevada district court.
Full Text of Rule 2
Amendment History
Amended eff. 3-1-19.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 2 packs a real change into a single clause. Before rules like this one existed, courts often kept legal claims — for money damages — on a separate track from equitable claims, such as requests for an injunction or specific performance, each with its own procedures and, in some systems, its own court. Rule 2 erases that line. Every civil claim in Nevada district court proceeds as one "civil action," whatever remedy the plaintiff is after.
The merger changes procedure, not substance. A plaintiff can still ask for damages and an injunction in the same case, and equitable doctrines and defenses remain available where the underlying claim calls for them. What disappears is the need to sort a case into a separate legal or equitable box before it can proceed. Anyone reading older cases that refer to an action "at law" or a suit "in equity" is reading a description of practice from before this kind of merger, not a live distinction under the current rules.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Rule 2 change?
It ended any procedural split between claims for money damages and claims for equitable relief. Under Rule 2, every civil claim moves forward as a single "civil action," regardless of the remedy the plaintiff seeks.
Can I still ask a Nevada district court for an injunction?
Yes. Merging law and equity into one civil action did not remove equitable remedies from the table. A plaintiff can combine a request for an injunction or other equitable relief with a claim for damages in the same action.
Does Rule 2 change what remedies are available to me?
No. It changes only the procedural label and track a case follows. The remedies available in a given case still depend on the substantive law governing the claim, not on the procedural merger Rule 2 describes.
Why do older Nevada cases talk about "equity" if there's only one civil action now?
Those cases describe practice and terminology that predate the current, merged procedural system. The distinction between law and equity still matters for substantive doctrines — like when a jury trial right attaches — even though it no longer determines which procedural track a case travels.
Does Rule 2 apply to proceedings outside the district courts?
Source & verification. Rule text, official Advisory Committee
Notes, and amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Nevada Rules of Civil
Procedure, adopted by the Supreme Court of Nevada. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: law and equity merger nevadaone form of action nevadacivil action nevada rule 2nrcp rule 2suits at law vs equity nevada