Rule 83.Rules by district courts; judge's directives
Group XI: General Provisions · Last amended March 1, 2019 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 83 lets each judicial district adopt its own local rules — subject to Supreme Court approval and consistency with the NRCP — and lets courts handle situations no rule covers, so long as they don't contradict the statewide rules.
(1)Local Rules. A judicial district may make and amend rules governing practice therein by submitting the proposed rules, approved by a majority of its district judges, to the Nevada Supreme Court for its review and approval. A local rule must be consistent with—but not duplicate—these rules. Unless otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court, a new or amended local rule takes effect 60 days after it is approved by the Supreme Court.
(2)Reference. The local rules of practice and the District Court Rules are referred to collectively in these rules as the local rules.
(3)Requirements of Form. A local rule imposing a requirement of form must not be enforced in a way that causes a party to lose any right because of a nonwillful failure to comply.
(b)Procedure When There Is No Controlling Law. In all cases not provided for by rule, the district courts may regulate their practice in any manner not inconsistent with these rules.
Amendment History
Amended eff. 1-1-05; Amended eff. 3-1-19.
Plain-English Summary
The NRCP can't anticipate every situation a district might face, so Rule 83 lets a judicial district fill in the gaps with local rules — covering things like filing formats, motion calendars, or courtroom procedure specific to that district. Before a local rule takes effect, a majority of that district's judges must approve it and send it to the Nevada Supreme Court for review; once approved, it takes effect 60 days later unless the Supreme Court sets a different date. A local rule can add detail, but it can't duplicate or conflict with the statewide rules, and a purely formal requirement in a local rule — a font, a caption format — can't be used to strip a party of a right just because the failure to comply wasn't willful.
For anything a rule doesn't address at all, Rule 83(b) gives district courts room to manage their own practice, as long as whatever they do lines up with the statewide rules. Together, these two provisions let local courts adapt without undercutting the uniformity the statewide rules are meant to provide.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are "local rules" and where would I find them?
Local rules are the practice rules a judicial district adopts for itself — covering things like filing procedures or motion calendars — and they're published by that district's court, separately from the statewide NRCP.
Can a local rule conflict with the NRCP?
No. Rule 83 requires a local rule to be consistent with the statewide rules and prohibits it from duplicating them.
How does a judicial district adopt or change a local rule?
A majority of that district's judges must approve the proposed rule, which then goes to the Nevada Supreme Court for review and approval before it can take effect.
I made an honest mistake with a local formatting requirement — can that cost me my case?
Rule 83 protects against that outcome for requirements of form: a court can't enforce a local formatting rule in a way that makes a party lose a right over a nonwillful slip-up.
What happens if no rule — state or local — addresses my procedural question?
Rule 83(b) lets the district court regulate its own practice for that situation, provided the approach doesn't conflict with the NRCP.
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:nevada local court ruleshow to adopt local rule nevada district courtlocal rule conflicts with NRCPno rule addresses my situation nevada courtNRCP 83