reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
NV Rev Stat § 47.050 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.050 - Rulings on evidence: Record of offer and ruling.

The judge may add any other or further statement which shows the character of the evidence, the form in which it was offered, the objection made and the ruling thereon. The judge may direct the making of an offer in question and answer form, and on request shall do so in actions tried without a jury, unless it clearly appears that the evidence is not admissible on any ground or is privileged.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.060 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.060 - Preliminary questions of admissibility: Determination.

  1. Preliminary questions concerning the qualification of a person to be a witness, the existence of a privilege or the admissibility of evidence shall be determined by the judge, subject to the provisions of NRS 47.070.  2. In making a determination the judge is not bound by the provisions of this title except the provisions of chapter 49 of NRS with respect to privileges.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.070 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.070 - Preliminary questions of admissibility: Relevancy conditioned on fact.

  1. When the relevancy of evidence depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the judge shall admit it upon the introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding of the fulfillment of the condition.  2. If under all the evidence upon the issue the jury might reasonably find that the fulfillment of the condition is not established, the judge shall instruct the jury to consider the issue and to disregard the evidence unless they find the condition was fulfilled.  3. If under all the evidence upon the issue the jury could not reasonably find that the condition was fulfilled, the judge shall instruct the jury to disregard the evidence.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.080 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.080 - Determinations of admissibility: Hearing of jury.

In jury cases, hearings on preliminary questions of admissibility, offers of proof in narrative or question and answer form, and statements of the judge showing the character of the evidence shall to the extent practicable, unless further restricted by NRS 47.090, be conducted out of the hearing of the jury, to prevent the suggestion of inadmissible evidence.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.090 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.090 - Preliminary hearings on confessions and evidence.

Preliminary hearings on the admissibility of confessions or statements by the accused or evidence allegedly unlawfully obtained shall be conducted outside the hearing of the jury. The accused does not by testifying at the hearing subject himself or herself to cross-examination as to other issues in the case. Testimony given by the accused at the hearing is not admissible against the accused on the issue of guilt at the trial.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.100 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.100 - Weight and credibility.

NRS 47.060 to 47.090, inclusive, do not limit the right of a party to introduce before the jury evidence relevant to weight or credibility.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.110 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.110 - Limited admissibility.

When evidence which is admissible as to one party or for one purpose but inadmissible as to another party or for another purpose is admitted, the judge, upon request, shall restrict the evidence to its proper scope and instruct the jury accordingly.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.120 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.120 - Remainder of writings or recorded statements.

  1. When any part of a writing or recorded statement is introduced by a party, the party may be required at that time to introduce any other part of it which is relevant to the part introduced, and any party may introduce any other relevant parts.  2. This section does not limit cross-examination.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 776)
NV Rev Stat § 47.130 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.130 - Matters of fact.

  1. The facts subject to judicial notice are facts in issue or facts from which they may be inferred.  2. A judicially noticed fact must be:  (a) Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or  (b) Capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned,  so that the fact is not subject to reasonable dispute.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.140 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.140 - Matters of law.

The laws subject to judicial notice are:  1. The Constitution and statutes of the United States, and the contents of the Federal Register.  2. The Constitution of this State and Nevada Revised Statutes.  3. Any other statute of this State if brought to the attention of the court by its title and the day of its passage.  4. A county, city or town code which has been filed as required by NRS 244.118, 268.014, 269.168 or the city charter and any city ordinance which has been filed or recorded as required by the applicable law.  5. The Nevada Administrative Code.  6. A regulation not included in the Nevada Administrative Code if adopted in accordance with law and brought to the attention of the court.  7. The population category and organization of a city incorporated pursuant to general law.  8. The constitution, statutes or other written law of any other state or territory of the United States, or of any foreign jurisdiction, as contained in a book or pamphlet published by its authority or proved to be commonly recognized in its courts.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777; A 1973, 6; 1977, 1388; 1985, 231, 366; 2001, 632)
NV Rev Stat § 47.150 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.150 - Discretionary and mandatory notice.

  1. A judge or court may take judicial notice, whether requested or not.  2. A judge or court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.160 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.160 - Opportunity to be heard.

A party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter to be noticed.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.170 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.170 - Time of taking notice.

Judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding prior to submission to the court or jury.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.180 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.180 - Presumptions generally: Effect; direct evidence.

  1. A presumption, other than a presumption against the accused in a criminal action, imposes on the party against whom it is directed the burden of proving that the nonexistence of the presumed fact is more probable than its existence.  2. As applied to presumptions, "direct evidence" means evidence which tends to establish the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact independently of the basic facts.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.190 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.190 - Determination on evidence of basic facts.

When a presumption is made conclusive by statute or no direct evidence is introduced contrary to the existence of the presumed fact, the question of the existence of the presumed fact depends upon the existence of the basic facts and is determined as follows:  1. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the evidence renders the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact.  2. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the evidence does not render the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact.  3. If reasonable minds would not necessarily agree as to whether the evidence renders the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact if they find from the evidence that the existence of the basic facts is more probable than not, but otherwise to find against the existence of the presumed fact.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 777)
NV Rev Stat § 47.200 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.200 - Determination on evidence of presumed fact: Where basic facts established.

When reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the evidence renders the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, but direct evidence is introduced contrary to the existence of the presumed fact, the question of the existence of the presumed fact is determined as follows:  1. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact.  2. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence does not render the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find in favor of the presumed fact.  3. If reasonable minds would not necessarily agree as to whether the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact unless they find from the direct evidence that its nonexistence is more probable than its existence, in which event they should find against its existence.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 778)
NV Rev Stat § 47.210 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.210 - Determination on evidence of presumed fact: Where basic facts lacking.

When reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the evidence does not render the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, but direct evidence is introduced concerning the existence of the presumed fact, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to determine the existence of the presumed fact from the direct evidence without reference to the presumption.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 778)
NV Rev Stat § 47.220 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.220 - Determination on evidence of presumed fact: Where basic facts doubtful.

When reasonable minds would not necessarily agree as to whether the evidence renders the existence of the basic facts more probable than not, and direct evidence is introduced concerning the existence of the presumed fact, the question of the existence of the presumed fact is determined as follows:  1. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the existence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact.  2. If reasonable minds would necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall direct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact.  3. If reasonable minds would not necessarily agree that the direct evidence renders the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, the judge shall submit the matter to the jury with an instruction to find in favor of the existence of the presumed fact if they find from the evidence that the existence of the basic facts is more probable than not and unless they find the nonexistence of the presumed fact more probable than not, otherwise to find against the existence of the presumed fact.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 778)
NV Rev Stat § 47.230 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.230 - Presumptions against accused in criminal actions.

  1. In criminal actions, presumptions against an accused recognized at common law or created by statute, including statutory provisions that certain facts are prima facie evidence of other facts or of guilt, are governed by this section.  2. The judge shall not direct the jury to find a presumed fact against the accused. When the presumed fact establishes guilt or is an element of the offense or negatives a defense, the judge may submit the question of guilt or of the existence of the presumed fact to the jury, if, but only if, a reasonable juror on the evidence as a whole, including the evidence of the basic facts, could find guilt or the presumed fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Under other presumptions, the existence of the presumed fact may be submitted to the jury if the basic facts are supported by substantial evidence, or are otherwise established, unless the evidence as a whole negatives the existence of the presumed fact.  3. Whenever the existence of a presumed fact against the accused is submitted to the jury, the judge shall give an instruction that the law declares that the jury may regard the basic facts as sufficient evidence of the presumed fact but does not require it to do so. In addition, if the presumed fact establishes guilt or is an element of the offense or negatives a defense, the judge shall instruct the jury that its existence must, on all the evidence, be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 779)
NV Rev Stat § 47.240 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.240 - Conclusive presumptions.

The following presumptions, and no others, are conclusive:  1. A malicious and guilty intent, from the deliberate commission of an unlawful act, for the purpose of injuring another.  2. The truth of the fact recited, from the recital in a written instrument between the parties thereto, or their successors in interest by a subsequent title, but this rule does not apply to the recital of a consideration.  3. Whenever a party has, by his or her own declaration, act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing true and to act upon such belief, the party cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it.  4. A tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his or her landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation.  5. The judgment or order of a court, when declared by titles 2, 3 and 6 of NRS to be conclusive; but such judgment or order must be alleged in the pleadings if there is an opportunity to do so; if there is no such opportunity, the judgment or order may be used as evidence.  6. Any other presumption which, by statute, is expressly made conclusive.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 779)
NV Rev Stat § 47.250 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 47 - General Provisions; Judicial Notice; Presumptions|NRS 47.250 - Disputable presumptions.

All other presumptions are disputable. The following are of that kind:  1. That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent.  2. That a person intends the ordinary consequences of that person’s voluntary act.  3. That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.  4. That higher evidence would be adverse from inferior being produced.  5. That money paid by one to another was due to the latter.  6. That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter.  7. That things which a person possesses are owned by that person.  8. That a person is the owner of property from exercising acts of ownership over it, or from common reputation of that ownership.  9. That official duty has been regularly performed.  10. That a court or judge, acting as such, whether in this State or any other state or country, was acting in the lawful exercise of the court’s or judge’s jurisdiction.  11. That a judicial record, when not conclusive, does still correctly determine or set forth the rights of the parties.  12. That a writing is truly dated.  13. That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail.  14. That a person not heard from in 3 years is dead.  15. That a child born in lawful wedlock is legitimate.  16. That the law has been obeyed.  17. That a trustee or other person, whose duty it was to convey real property to a particular person, has actually conveyed to that person, when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such person or a successor in interest.  18. In situations not governed by the Uniform Commercial Code:  (a) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid.  (b) That private transactions have been fair and regular.  (c) That the ordinary course of business has been followed.  (d) That there was good and sufficient consideration for a written contract.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 779; A 1993, 2761)
NV Rev Stat § 48.015 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 48 - Admissibility Generally|NRS 48.015 - "Relevant evidence" defined.

As used in this chapter, "relevant evidence" means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 780)
NV Rev Stat § 48.025 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 48 - Admissibility Generally|NRS 48.025 - Relevant evidence generally admissible; irrelevant evidence inadmissible.

  1. All relevant evidence is admissible, except:  (a) As otherwise provided by this title;  (b) As limited by the Constitution of the United States or of the State of Nevada; or  (c) Where a statute limits the review of an administrative determination to the record made or evidence offered before that tribunal.  2. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 780)
NV Rev Stat § 48.035 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 48 - Admissibility Generally|NRS 48.035 - Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion or waste of time.

  1. Although relevant, evidence is not admissible if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, of confusion of the issues or of misleading the jury.  2. Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by considerations of undue delay, waste of time or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.  3. Evidence of another act or crime which is so closely related to an act in controversy or a crime charged that an ordinary witness cannot describe the act in controversy or the crime charged without referring to the other act or crime shall not be excluded, but at the request of an interested party, a cautionary instruction shall be given explaining the reason for its admission.  (Added to NRS by 1971, 780; A 1979, 37)
NV Rev Stat § 48.039 (2021)
2021 Nevada Revised Statutes|Chapter 48 - Admissibility Generally|NRS 48.039 - Testimony of witness who previously underwent hypnosis to recall subject matter of testimony.

  1. The testimony of a witness who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events that are the subject matter of the testimony is admissible if:  (a) The witness, or the parent or guardian of the witness if the witness is a minor, gave informed consent to the hypnosis;  (b) The person who induced the hypnosis is:  (1) A provider of health care;  (2) A clinical social worker who is licensed pursuant to chapter 641B of NRS; or  (3) An officer or employee or former officer or employee of a law enforcement agency,  who is trained in forensic hypnosis and who is not otherwise currently involved in the investigation of a case or action in which the witness is a victim, witness or defendant;  (c) Before the hypnosis was induced, a written record was made that includes, without limitation:  (1) A description of the subject matter of the hypnosis as provided by the witness; and  (2) The information that was provided to the hypnotist concerning the subject matter of the hypnosis;  (d) The entire session at which the hypnosis was induced was electronically recorded by audio or video recording equipment, including, without limitation, any interview that was conducted before or after the hypnosis was induced;  (e) The recording of the entire session at which the hypnosis was induced was made available by the party who produced the witness to each party involved in the case, pursuant to the discovery procedures as provided in NRS 174.235 to 174.295, inclusive, the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure or the Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedure, depending upon the nature of the proceedings; and  (f) The hypnotist and the witness were the only persons present during the session of hypnosis unless the hypnotist or a law enforcement officer who is investigating the criminal case, if any, determined that it was necessary for one of the following persons to be present during the session:  (1) A parent or guardian of a witness who is a minor; or  (2) An artist employed by a law enforcement agency.  2. The court, on its own motion or that of a party, may exclude the testimony of a person who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events which are the subject matter of the testimony if the court determines that such testimony is unreliable or is otherwise inadmissible.  3. The court shall instruct the jury to exercise caution when considering the reliability of the testimony of a person who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events that are the subject matter of the testimony.  4. The provisions of this section do not limit:  (a) The ability of a party to attack the credibility of a witness who previously has undergone hypnosis to recall events that are the subject matter of the witness’s testimony; or  (b) The legal grounds upon which to admit or exclude the testimony of such a witness.  5. As used in this section, "provider of health care" has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 629.031.  (Added to NRS by 1997, 828)