Nevada courts recognize diminished value. They talk about compensation for diminished value in several different ways:
Nevada Pattern Jury Instruction 10.09 tells a jury how to award damages in a case of diminished value. The court instructs the jury that if repairs don’t fully restore the value of the damaged property, the jury should award the victim the difference between fair market value and the value post repair. The jury should also award the cost of repairs.
In the Dugan v. Gotsopoulos case, the Supreme Court of Nevada said that the court should allow a victim to present evidence of a vehicle’s value before and after an accident. In the Dugan case, the victim couldn’t pay to fix the vehicle’s damage. Eventually, the victim scrapped the vehicle. The court said that the victim should even be able to admit Kelley Blue Book information to prove the vehicle’s value. The court determined that Nevada Revised Statute 51.245 says that Kelley Blue Book is admissible as a generally accepted compilation of information and values.
Finally, the courts recognize diminished value in other areas of law. In contract law, an aggrieved party of a breach of contract can argue that they suffered losses because the breach of contract reduced the value of their property. The chances are high that the court will recognize the diminished value as a legitimate category of damages after a vehicle accident.