Nevada Slip and Fall Settlement Calculator
Get a rough estimate of what a Nevada slip-and-fall claim might be worth. Enter your medical bills and losses and answer a few plain questions — the tool weighs how provable the owner's fault is and your share of fault. This is an estimate to understand the factors, not a prediction or an offer.
This is a rough estimate, not a prediction or an offer.
Slip-and-fall claims turn on proving the property owner was at fault — there is no formula that predicts a settlement. This shows the factors and a wide range to help you understand value. Consult a Nevada premises-liability attorney about your case.
Enter the medical bills and losses to see an estimated range
The multiplier method is a rough starting point, not a guarantee. Slip-and-fall value depends most on proving the owner's fault and on the available insurance. An attorney is the only way to value your specific claim. This tool is not legal advice and RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm.
How the Estimate Works
No tool can predict a slip-and-fall settlement. This calculator applies the multiplier method (pain and suffering as a multiple of your medical bills), then does something the thin online calculators skip: it weighs how provable the owner's fault is. A spill the staff caused or knew about is worth far more than a hazard nobody can show the owner knew about. It then estimates your own comparative fault from a few plain questions and applies Nevada's rules.
Proving the Owner Was at Fault
Premises liability has four parts: a dangerous condition existed, the owner knew or should have known about it, they failed to fix it or warn you, and that caused your injury. The middle part — notice — is where most slip-and-fall cases are won or lost. Strong evidence (an incident report, photos of the hazard, surveillance video, cleaning and maintenance logs, prior complaints) is what turns a claim from a token offer into real money. A posted warning sign or cone works against you: it shows the owner did warn, and it makes the hazard "open and obvious," shifting fault onto you.
Nevada Premises-Liability Rules
Open-and-obvious hazards. In Nevada, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). Nevada treats an open-and-obvious hazard as only a comparative-fault factor, not a bar to the claim. In Foster v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 128 Nev. 772, 291 P.3d 150 (2012), the Nevada Supreme Court rejected the rule that the open-and-obvious nature of a danger automatically relieves a landowner of liability and held that landowners owe a general duty of reasonable care to all entrants regardless of whether a dangerous condition is open and obvious. The obviousness of the hazard is one circumstance the fact-finder weighs in deciding whether the landowner acted reasonably and whether the plaintiff exercised reasonable self-protection (i.e., comparative fault under Nevada's modified-comparative-negligence rule). Summary judgment for a defendant solely on open-and-obvious grounds is generally improper after Foster.
Ice and snow. Nevada applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained walkway can support a claim. Nevada has not adopted the "natural accumulation" no-duty rule used in states like Illinois and Ohio. Under Foster v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 128 Nev. 772, 291 P.3d 150 (2012), a landowner owes a general duty of ordinary reasonable care to all entrants, and that duty extends to dangerous conditions regardless of their open-and-obvious nature. A landowner can therefore be liable for failing to take reasonable steps to address ice/snow (e.g., removal, sanding/salting, drainage) where the foreseeability and gravity of harm and feasibility of precautions make such steps reasonable. Because most of Nevada is high desert with little snowfall, natural ice/snow accumulation is rarely litigated as a distinct doctrine, but the governing standard is ordinary reasonable care, not a no-duty rule.
Public property. If you fell on government property, Nevada requires a formal notice of claim before you can sue. Nevada's tort-claims statute, NRS 41.036, requires a person with a tort claim against the State (or its agencies) to file the claim with the Attorney General, and a person with a claim against a political subdivision (city, county, etc.) to file with that subdivision's governing body, "within 2 years after the time the cause of action accrues" (NRS 41.036(1)-(2)). Unlike most states, NRS 41.036(3) provides that filing this claim is NOT a condition precedent to bringing suit under NRS 41.031, and Nevada does NOT impose a short 90- or 180-day notice-of-claim prerequisite. The practical deadline therefore mirrors the 2-year personal-injury statute of limitations (730 days). Claimants should still file early because the suit itself is governed by the 2-year limitations period.
Your Fault & the Deadline to File
Nevada follows modified comparative negligence (51% bar). Your award is reduced by your share of fault, and you recover nothing once you are 51% or more at fault.
NRS 41.141(1): the plaintiff's comparative negligence does not bar recovery if it "was not greater than" the negligence of the defendants. So a plaintiff who is exactly 50% at fault still recovers (reduced by their share), but one who is 51% or more at fault recovers nothing. This is a modified comparative rule with the bar at 51%+. With multiple defendants, the plaintiff's fault is compared to the COMBINED fault of all defendants, and each defendant is severally (not jointly) liable for its own percentage, except for the statutory carve-outs in subsection 5 (e.g., strict liability, intentional torts, products liability, concerted action).
Nevada generally requires a slip-and-fall lawsuit to be filed within 2 years of the fall (the statute of limitations). NRS 11.190(4)(e) sets a 2-year limitation for "an action to recover damages for injuries to a person ... caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another." The discovery rule can delay accrual until the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury; tolling may apply for minors and incapacity (NRS 11.250). Source: Foster v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 128 Nev. 772, 291 P.3d 150 (2012) (open and obvious; reasonable-care duty); NRS 41.036 (tort claims against State and political subdivisions); NRS 41.141 (modified comparative negligence, 51% bar); NRS 11.190(4)(e) (2-year personal-injury limitations)..
- Open-and-obvious is NOT a defense bar in Nevada. Under Foster v. Costco (2012), property owners owe every entrant a general duty of reasonable care, and the obviousness of a hazard is just one comparative-fault factor for the jury - it does not eliminate the owner's duty.
- Nevada uses modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar (NRS 41.141): an injured person can recover only if they are not MORE at fault than the defendant(s), and damages are reduced by their share of fault.
- You generally have 2 years from the date of the fall to sue for a personal injury (NRS 11.190(4)(e)).
- Falls on government property: NRS 41.036 gives you 2 years to file a tort claim with the Attorney General (State property) or the city/county governing body (local property). Nevada is unusual - there is no short 90- or 180-day notice deadline, and filing the claim is not even a prerequisite to suing.
- Nevada has no special 'natural accumulation' immunity for ice/snow; the ordinary reasonable-care duty applies, though snow-and-ice falls are uncommon given Nevada's desert climate.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much is my Nevada slip and fall claim worth?
No one can tell you a number in advance, and slip-and-fall is harder than a car accident because you must prove the owner was at fault. A rough estimate adds your economic damages and a pain-and-suffering multiplier, discounts it by how provable the owner's fault is, and reduces it for your share of fault under Nevada's modified comparative negligence (51% bar) rule. The available insurance also caps recovery — an attorney is the only way to value your specific case.
Does a "wet floor" sign hurt my Nevada claim?
Yes, usually. A posted warning shows the owner satisfied part of their duty to warn and makes the hazard "open and obvious," which shifts fault onto you. In Nevada, an open-and-obvious hazard is only a comparative-fault factor (it reduces, not bars). It reduces — and sometimes defeats — a claim, but not always (a hidden or inadequate sign may not help the owner).
Can I sue for a fall on ice or snow in Nevada?
Nevada applies an ordinary reasonable-care duty to ice and snow, so a poorly-maintained or unaddressed icy walkway can support a claim, subject to your own comparative fault. This is general information, not legal advice — consult a Nevada attorney.
How long do I have to file in Nevada?
Generally 2 years from the fall. If you fell on public property, a much shorter notice-of-claim deadline (around 730 days) applies first. NRS 11.190(4)(e) sets a 2-year limitation for "an action to recover damages for injuries to a person ... caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another." The discovery rule can delay accrual until the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury; tolling may apply for minors and incapacity (NRS 11.250).
Is this calculator accurate?
It is a rough estimate to show the factors that drive value — not a prediction or an offer. Slip-and-fall outcomes vary enormously and depend on proving fault and on the available insurance. Treat any number here as a ballpark and consult a Nevada attorney.
Disclaimer
This estimator is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome. RecordingLaw.com is not a law firm. The value of a slip-and-fall claim can only be assessed by a licensed attorney reviewing your specific facts.