Invasion of Privacy Laws in Nevada
(Explained by Las Vegas Personal Injury Lawyers)


If someone in Nevada has made public private information about you, you may be able to recover damages in a Las Vegas invasion of privacy lawsuit.

In this article, our Las Vegas personal injury lawyers explain Nevada's invasion of privacy laws and what money damages may be recoverable.

judge banging gavel

1. Can I sue for "Invasion of Privacy" in Las Vegas, Nevada?

Invasion of privacy is defined as the intrusion into a person's personal life without just cause. In turn, invasion of privacy is subdivided into four different "causes of action." These include:

  1. Intrusion upon seclusion,
  2. Appropriation of likeness or identity,
  3. Public disclosure of private facts, and
  4. Portrayal in a false light.

The victim of an invasion of privacy may bring a lawsuit for one or more of these claims against the person or entity that engaged in the wrongdoing. If successful, the plaintiff may obtain money damages.


Common defenses to "invasion of privacy" claims in Nevada include:

  • The defendant revealed truths which were not privileged (note this defense does not apply to public disclosure of private facts),
  • The victim consented to the invasion of privacy, and the defendant's intrusion did not exceed the scope of this consent, or
  • The defendant was privileged to invade the victim's privacy.

Note that invasion of privacy cases tend to be more difficult to win for public figures than private citizens.1

2. What is "Intrusion Upon Seclusion" in Las Vegas, NV?

A person may sue for "intrusion upon seclusion" if any aspect of his/her life that he/she reasonably expected would not be intruded upon was violated. Common examples of this cause of action include wire-tapping the plaintiff's phone or putting hidden cameras in the plaintiff's residence.

Img elder abuse scale optimized
"Intrusion upon seclusion" claims involve "highly offensive" invasions of privacy.

In order to establish a lawsuit for intrusion upon seclusion, the plaintiff must prove the following "elements:"

  • The defendant intentionally intruded into the plaintiff's privacy,
  • The intrusion (which can be physical or nonphysical) would be considered highly offensive to a reasonable person,
  • The defendant's conduct was the actual or proximate cause of the plaintiff's privacy being violated, and
  • The intrusion was the actual or proximate cause of the plaintiff suffering some measure of harm.

Note that the defendant's motive is irrelevant; therefore, a defendant may be liable for intrusion upon seclusion even if he/she had no intention to offend the plaintiff.

Also note that the plaintiff does not need to show that he/she underwent any pecuniary (financial) loss; emotional distress and mental anguish are sufficient damages to justify an intrusion upon seclusion suit.2

3. What is "Appropriation of Likeness or Identity" in Las Vegas, Nevada?

Appropriation of likeness or identity is the unauthorized use of a plaintiff's name or likeness for commercial purposes by the defendant. A common defense to this claim is that the appropriation was newsworthy: If the plaintiff is a newsworthy figure, publication of his/her name or likeness is legal as long as the use is not for business or advertising.

Damages for the appropriation of likeness or identity are measured by the plaintiff's stature, which in turn is determined by the general public. For most plaintiffs, both emotional harm and general damages are recoverable.3

4. What is "Public Disclosure of Private Facts" in Las Vegas, Nevada?

In order for a plaintiff to prevail on a cause of action for "public disclosure of private facts," the plaintiff must prove the following:

Img money gavel optimized
Plaintiffs may recover damages for mental anguish through a "public disclosure of private facts" suit.
  • The defendant made a disclosure of facts about the plaintiff's private life;
  • This disclosure is considered highly offensive to a reasonable person;
  • This disclosure was communicated to the general public (or to sufficient people so that it would likely reach the general public);
  • The disclosure of these private facts is not newsworthy and serves no legitimate public interest;
  • The defendant was at fault for making the disclosure; and
  • The defendant's actions were both the actual and proximate cause of the disclosure and of the harm the plaintiff suffered.

Defendants will not be found liable if the facts he/she revealed were already known or a matter of public record. And plaintiffs are not required to prove any damages or pecuniary loss: Showing emotional distress and mental anguish are sufficient to win at court.4

5. What is "Portrayal in a False Light" in Las Vegas, Nevada?

Portrayal in a false light is a publication which gives people a false impression of the plaintiff. To prove this claim in court, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant published something that gave others an inaccurate impression about him/her. Further, the false light that he/she was put in would be considered highly offensive to a reasonable person.

Similar to other invasion of privacy claims, the plaintiff must prove actual or proximate causation in order to recover damages. But as opposed to appropriation of name or likeness, there is no requirement that there be a commercial use. The plaintiff may recover for the damage to his/her reputation, emotional stress, and for any financial loss that he/she may have suffered.5

Was your privacy invaded in Nevada? Call us for help...

There are many details and elements involved with the four different invasion of privacy causes of action. Therefore, the process can be confusing and overwhelming. Our Las Vegas personal injury attorneys and staff at 702-DEFENSE (702-333-3673) are here to advocate on your behalf.

Legal References:

  1. Invasion of Privacy, Nevada Press Association.
  2. Intrusion upon Seclusion, Harvard, Restatement of the Law, 2nd, Torts, 652B.
  3. See e.g., Hetter v. Eigth Judicial Dist. Court of State in and for County of Clark, 110 Nev. 513 (1994).
  4. See e.g., Montesano v. Donrey Media Group, 99 Nev. 644 (1983).
  5. See e.g., Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Hyatt, 335 P.3d 125 (2014).


Free attorney consultations...

The attorneys at Shouse Law Group bring more than 100 years collective experience fighting for individuals. We're ready to fight for you. Call us 24 hours a day, 365 days a year at 855-LAW-FIRM for a free case evaluation.

Regain peace of mind...

Shouse Law Defense Group has multiple locations throughout California. Click Office Locations to find out which office is right for you.

Office Locations

Shouse Law Group has multiple locations all across California, Nevada, and Colorado. Click Office Locations to find out which office is right for you.

Call us 24/7 (855) 396-0370