Liability for defective products in Nevada can reach companies beyond the manufacturer. The Nevada Supreme Court has said strict liability remains available against those who design, manufacture, distribute, or sell a dangerously defective product. A company that only licenses its brand is treated differently.
Knowing who to name matters, because a missed company may be hard to add after a deadline passes. This guide explains who may be liable, how fault is divided, and which defenses can apply.
Key Takeaways
- Strict liability remains available against those who design, manufacture, distribute, or sell a dangerously defective product.
- In 2025, the Nevada Supreme Court held that a trademark licensor is not strictly liable when its role is limited to licensing its name.
- NRS 42.005 refers to a manufacturer, distributor, or seller of a defective product.
- NRS 41.141 limits several liability in some settings, and it does not affect joint and several liability, if any, in strict liability actions.
- Nevada has declined to apply comparative negligence to strict products liability.
Who Can Be Sued for a Defective Product in Nevada?
| Company | Role | Nevada position |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | Makes the finished product | Strict liability available |
| Distributor | Moves the product to sellers | Strict liability available |
| Component maker | Makes a part of the product | Depends on the facts, such as whether the part was defective |
| Retailer or seller | Sells to the consumer | Strict liability available |
| Brand owner or licensor | Puts its name on the product | Not strictly liable if it only licenses its name; different if it substantially participates |
What Do Nevada Courts Say About Manufacturers and Distributors?
In Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Dolinski, the Nevada Supreme Court held that a manufacturer and distributor of a bottled beverage could be liable without negligence or a contract with the user. Rivera v. Philip Morris, Inc. states that manufacturers and distributors of defective products should be held responsible for injuries those products cause.
Can a Brand or Trademark Owner Be Liable?
It depends on the company’s role. In Hernandez v. The Home Depot, Inc., a 2025 decision, the Nevada Supreme Court held that a trademark licensor is not subject to strict liability for product defects when its role is limited to licensing its trade name. The court said the holding does not foreclose strict liability where a licensor substantially participates in the design, manufacture, or distribution of the product. Claims not based on strict liability may also remain available.
NRS 42.005 separately refers to a manufacturer, distributor, or seller of a defective product. For online sellers and marketplaces, a lawyer can explain how the law may apply to the facts.
How Is Responsibility Divided Among Defendants?
The general rule in NRS 41.141 is that, when comparative negligence is raised, each defendant is severally liable for its own share. The statute says this does not affect joint and several liability, if any, in actions based on strict liability or on an injury resulting from a product manufactured, distributed, sold, or used in Nevada. A defendant sued only for negligence may be responsible only for its own share. A lawyer can explain how this applies when one defendant cannot pay.
Does Your Own Fault Reduce a Strict Liability Claim?
In Young’s Machine Co. v. Long, the Nevada Supreme Court refused to apply the comparative negligence statute to strict products liability. The court described assumption of the risk and misuse of the product as the defenses Nevada had recognized. Ordinary contributory negligence was not to be considered. A company may still argue that the injured person’s conduct was the sole cause of the injury.
Negligence claims are different. If you also sue for negligence or sue a driver or other party, comparative negligence can come into play.
How Do You Identify Who Is Liable?
- Product labels, model numbers, and serial numbers
- Receipts and order confirmations
- Manuals, packaging, and warranty cards
- Recall notices that name the company
- Inspection of the product by a qualified expert
Our Nevada defective products page explains how these claims work.
How Long Do You Have to Sue?
Nevada generally allows 2 years to sue for personal injury under NRS 11.190(4)(e). Exceptions can apply. The clock may be running while the responsible companies are being identified, so a lawyer can help confirm the date that applies.
Talk With a Nevada Defective Product Lawyer
Vaksman Khalfin, PC handles Nevada defective product claims and has an office in Las Vegas. A lawyer can review your situation and explain the options that may be available. Contact us or visit our Nevada defective products page to learn more.
General information, not legal advice. This page is provided for general informational purposes only and is not medical advice. No attorney-client relationship is formed by reading this page or contacting the firm. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Reviewed by Robert B. Vaksman, Partner, Vaksman Khalfin, PC (admitted in Nevada). Last reviewed: 11/05/2026
Frequently Asked Questions
The Nevada Supreme Court has said strict liability remains available against those who design, manufacture, distribute, or sell a dangerously defective product. A lawyer can explain who may be responsible in your situation.
Possibly. In Hernandez v. The Home Depot, Inc., the Nevada Supreme Court said strict liability remains available against those who sell a dangerously defective product. A lawyer can explain how this applies.
Often a lawsuit can be brought against an out-of-state company, but the court's authority over that company depends on its connections to Nevada. A lawyer can explain where a case can be filed.
In Young's Machine Co. v. Long, the Nevada Supreme Court refused to apply comparative negligence to strict products liability. Misuse and assumption of the risk are recognized defenses, and negligence claims follow different rules.
