Group V: Disclosures and Discovery · Last amended March 1, 2019 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 36 lets a party ask another party to admit specific facts, legal conclusions applied to facts, or the genuineness of documents, and treats an unanswered request as admitted after 30 days.
(1)Scope. A party may serve on any other party a written request to admit, for purposes of the pending action only, the truth of any matters within the scope of Rule 26(b)(1) relating to:
(A)facts, the application of law to fact, or opinions about either; and
(B)the genuineness of any described documents.
(2)Form; Copy of a Document. Each matter must be separately stated. A request to admit the genuineness of a document must be accompanied by a copy of the document unless it is, or has been, otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and copying.
(3)Time to Respond; Effect of Not Responding. A matter is admitted unless, within 30 days after being served, the party to whom the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written answer or objection addressed to the matter and signed by the party or its attorney. A shorter or longer time for responding may be stipulated to under Rule 29 or be ordered by the court.
(4)Answer. If a matter is not admitted, the answer must specifically deny it or state in detail why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny it. A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of a matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest. The answering party may assert lack of knowledge or information as a reason for failing to admit or deny only if the party states that it has made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient to enable it to admit or deny.
(5)Objections. The grounds for objecting to a request must be stated. A party must not object solely on the ground that the request presents a genuine issue for trial.
(6)Motion Regarding the Sufficiency of an Answer or Objection. The requesting party may move to determine the sufficiency of an answer or objection. Unless the court finds an objection justified, it must order that an answer be served. On finding that an answer does not comply with this rule, the court may order either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be served. The court may defer its final decision until a pretrial conference or a specified time before trial. Rule 37(a)(5) applies to an award of expenses.
(7)Limitations on Number of Requests.
(A)No party may serve upon any other single party to an action more than 40 requests for admission under Rule 36(a)(1)(A) without obtaining:
(i)a written stipulation under Rule 29 of the party to which the additional requests are directed; or
(ii)upon a showing of good cause, a court order granting leave to serve a specific number of additional requests.
(B)Subparts of requests count as separate requests. There is no limitation on requests for admission relating to the genuineness of documents under Rule 36(a)(1)(B).
(b)Effect of an Admission; Withdrawing or Amending It. A matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended. Subject to Rule 16(d)4e), the court may permit withdrawal or amendment if it would promote the presentation of the merits of the action and if the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the action on the merits. An admission under this rule is not an admission for any other purpose and cannot be used against the party in any other proceeding.
Notes
Drafter’s Note, Amendment Effective January 1, 2005: Subdivision (a) is amended to conform to the federal rule, as amended in 1993, by reflecting changes to Rule 26(a) and (d) that require a party to comply with Rule 26(a) before serving formal discovery requests. It is also amended to provide that stipulations to modify the time for a response are subject to Rule 29. Subdivision (a) is also amended to incorporate language from Rule 26(f), requiring restatement of the request for admission before the answer or response. The amendments to subdivision (b) are technical. Subdivision (c), which does not appear in the federal rule, is retained, including the language limiting requests for admissions to 40 in number except as to genuineness of documents. The provision is amended to include a reference to Rule 29 with respect to stipulations to exceed the 40-request limit.
A request for admission asks the other side to concede something in writing, so the parties do not have to spend trial time proving what nobody disputes. Rule 36 covers three kinds of ground: plain facts, opinions or conclusions about how the law applies to the facts, and whether a particular document is genuine. It is a narrowing tool, not a fact-finding one — its purpose is to pare down what needs to be litigated, not to dig up new information the way interrogatories or depositions do.
Each request must stand on its own, stated separately, and a request about a document's genuineness has to come with a copy of that document unless it has already been made available. The responding party gets 30 days to answer or object in writing, signed by the party or the attorney. Here is the trap: silence is not a safe option. A matter is treated as admitted automatically if no timely, signed response comes in. When a party does respond, a flat denial is not enough on its own — the denial has to address the substance of what was asked squarely, and if only part of a statement is true, the answer has to admit that part and qualify or deny the rest. Claiming ignorance only works if the party has made a real effort to find out and still cannot admit or deny after that search in good conscience. Nevada also caps the numbers: no more than 40 requests going to the truth of facts or opinions per party, absent agreement or a court order allowing more, though requests about a document's genuineness are not part of that cap.
Once something is admitted — whether by an actual answer or by silence — it is locked in for that case. The court can allow a party to withdraw or amend an admission, but only if doing so would help resolve the case on its merits and would not unfairly prejudice the other side's ability to prove its case. An admission made under Rule 36 also stays confined to that lawsuit; it cannot be dragged into some other proceeding as an admission there. And if a party denies something the other side later proves true at real cost and effort, Rule 37(c)(2) lets the requesting party ask the court to make the party who wrongly denied it pay the expenses of that proof.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a request for admission, and how is it different from an interrogatory?
A request for admission (RFA), sometimes called a request to admit, asks the other party to concede that a specific fact, legal conclusion applied to a fact, or a document's genuineness is true. Unlike an interrogatory, it is not meant to gather new information — it is meant to eliminate disputes that do not need to be tried, narrowing the issues that remain for trial.
What happens if I do not respond to a request for admission within 30 days in Nevada?
The matter is automatically deemed admitted. You do not need a court order or any further step by the other side — silence past the 30-day deadline (absent a stipulated or court-ordered extension) locks the matter in as if you had admitted it in writing.
Can I just deny a request for admission without explanation?
Rule 36(a)(4) requires more than a bare denial. The response has to address the substance of the request squarely, and if only part of it is accurate, the answer must admit that part and specifically qualify or deny the remainder. Claiming you lack knowledge is only proper if you made a reasonable inquiry and still cannot answer in good conscience.
How many requests for admission can I serve in a Nevada case?
Up to 40 requests going to the truth of facts, the application of law to fact, or opinions on either, per party, unless the other side stipulates to more or the court grants leave for additional requests upon a showing of good cause. Requests limited to the genuineness of documents fall outside that 40-request cap entirely.
Can I take back an admission I made by mistake?
Yes, but only with the court's permission. The court can allow withdrawal or amendment of an admission when doing so would help present the case on its merits and would not unfairly prejudice the other party's ability to prove or defend its case at that point.
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:requests for admissionRFArequest to admitnevada rule 36deemed admitted 30 days nevadaadmitting facts in a lawsuit nevada