Nevada call recording law
Is Nevada a one-party consent state?
All-party consent
No, for phone calls. The Nevada Supreme Court reads NRS 200.620 as barring the recording of a phone call unless both parties to the call consent (Ditech Financial v. Buckles, 2017). For in-person private conversations, the consent of one participant is enough (NRS 200.650).
Last checked October 13, 2026 · 15 quoted facts from official pages
Nevada at a glance
- Phone calls
- All-party consent
- The law
- Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620 (interception of wire communication) (official source, opens in a new tab)
- In-person conversations
- A different rule (see below)
- Criminal penalty
- Willfully and knowingly violating the statutes is a category D felony: 1 to 4 years in state prison, and the court may add a fine of up to $5,000.
- Lawsuits
- The person whose call was intercepted without consent can recover actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000 (whichever is greater), plus punitive damages and costs including a reasonable attorney's fee.
- Calls across state lines
- An official source addresses them (see below)
- Last checked
- October 13, 2026
The law
- Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620 (interception of wire communication) (official source, opens in a new tab)
- Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.650 (surreptitious recording of private conversations) (official source, opens in a new tab)
- Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.690 (penalties and civil liability) (official source, opens in a new tab)
- Ditech Financial LLC v. Buckles, 133 Nev. Adv. Op. 64 (Sept. 14, 2017), No. 70475 (applying Lane v. Allstate Ins. Co., 114 Nev. 1176, 969 P.2d 938 (1998)) (official source, opens in a new tab)
Penalties
- Criminal
- Willfully and knowingly violating the statutes is a category D felony: 1 to 4 years in state prison, and the court may add a fine of up to $5,000.
- Civil (lawsuits)
- The person whose call was intercepted without consent can recover actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000 (whichever is greater), plus punitive damages and costs including a reasonable attorney's fee.
In-person conversations
NRS 200.650 bars surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording a private conversation unless one of the people in the conversation authorizes it.
Calls across state lines
The Nevada Supreme Court held that NRS 200.620 does not apply to the recording of interstate calls when the recording takes place outside Nevada; in that case the calls were judged under the laws of the places where they were recorded (Ditech Financial v. Buckles, 2017).
What this means for a business that records calls
In Lane v. Allstate (1998), as quoted in Ditech, the Nevada Supreme Court read NRS 200.620 to prohibit taping phone conversations with the consent of only one party. The statute lets agencies and public utilities that answer emergency lines record calls they make in response, if they inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded.
Notices and warnings: Nevada lets emergency-line agencies and public utilities record calls they make in response if they inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded (NRS 200.620).
Callers can be in any state. The state-by-state table compares every state's rule, and the disclosure generator writes a plain notice sentence such as “This call may be recorded.” Whether a notice is enough under Nevada's law is a question for a lawyer licensed in Nevada.
Recording notices on CallFlux numbers
CallFlux plays a recording notice to callers on every tracking number that records, before the call connects.
What the official sources say
NRS 200.620 makes intercepting a wire communication unlawful unless its listed conditions are met.
“it is unlawful for any person to intercept or attempt to intercept any wire communication unless:”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
The statute pairs one party's prior consent with an emergency condition (joined by 'and').
“with the prior consent of one of the parties to the communication; and (b) An emergency situation exists”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
The Nevada Supreme Court describes NRS 200.620 as requiring both parties' consent to record a phone call.
“NRS 200.620 prohibits a person from recording a telephone call unless both parties participating in the call consent to the recording.”
Source: acis-api.nvcourts.gov (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Lane v. Allstate (1998), as quoted in Ditech, interpreted NRS 200.620 to bar one-party-consent phone recording.
“interpreted NRS 200.620 "to prohibit the taping of telephone conversations with the consent of only one party."”
Source: acis-api.nvcourts.gov (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
NRS 200.620 does not apply to interstate calls recorded outside Nevada.
“NRS 200.620 does not apply to the recording of interstate calls when the act of recording takes place outside Nevada.”
Source: acis-api.nvcourts.gov (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
In Ditech, legality was governed by the laws of the states where the calls were recorded, not Nevada.
“the places where the conversations were intercepted and recorded, not according to the laws of Nevada where the calls were received.”
Source: acis-api.nvcourts.gov (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Recording private in-person conversations surreptitiously is barred unless one participant authorizes it.
“unless authorized to do so by one of the persons engaging in the conversation.”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
NRS 200.650 covers surreptitious listening, monitoring or recording of private conversations.
“a person shall not intrude upon the privacy of other persons by surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording ... any private conversation”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Show 7 more facts
Penalties apply to willful and knowing violations.
“A person who willfully and knowingly violates NRS 200.620 to 200.650, inclusive:”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
A violation is a category D felony.
“Shall be punished for a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130.”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Category D felony: prison term of 1 to 4 years.
“a minimum term of not less than 1 year and a maximum term of not more than 4 years.”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Category D felony: optional fine of up to $5,000.
“the court may impose a fine of not more than $5,000, unless a greater fine is authorized or required by statute.”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Civil liability: actual damages or $100 per day liquidated damages, minimum $1,000, whichever is greater.
“Actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000, whichever is greater;”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Civil liability also includes punitive damages and costs with a reasonable attorney's fee.
“Punitive damages; and (3) His or her costs reasonably incurred in the action, including a reasonable attorney's fee”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Agencies and public utilities may record calls they initiate in response to an emergency line call if they inform the other party.
“if the agency or public utility informs the other party that the conversation is being recorded.”
Source: leg.state.nv.us (official source, opens in a new tab) · read October 13, 2026
Nevada call recording questions
Is Nevada a one-party consent state?
No, for phone calls. The Nevada Supreme Court reads NRS 200.620 as barring the recording of a phone call unless both parties to the call consent (Ditech Financial v. Buckles, 2017). For in-person private conversations, the consent of one participant is enough (NRS 200.650).
What is the penalty for recording a call illegally in Nevada?
Willfully and knowingly violating the statutes is a category D felony: 1 to 4 years in state prison, and the court may add a fine of up to $5,000.
What does Nevada's law say about lawsuits over recorded calls?
The person whose call was intercepted without consent can recover actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000 (whichever is greater), plus punitive damages and costs including a reasonable attorney's fee.
Does Nevada use the same rule for in-person conversations?
NRS 200.650 bars surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording a private conversation unless one of the people in the conversation authorizes it.
What about calls between Nevada and another state?
The Nevada Supreme Court held that NRS 200.620 does not apply to the recording of interstate calls when the recording takes place outside Nevada; in that case the calls were judged under the laws of the places where they were recorded (Ditech Financial v. Buckles, 2017).
What do Nevada's sources say about businesses that record calls?
In Lane v. Allstate (1998), as quoted in Ditech, the Nevada Supreme Court read NRS 200.620 to prohibit taping phone conversations with the consent of only one party. The statute lets agencies and public utilities that answer emergency lines record calls they make in response, if they inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded.