Not legal advice. This site is an editorial reference. Laws change — always confirm with a qualified attorney in the relevant jurisdiction before recording, and check each page’s last reviewed date.

Call Recording Laws in Nevada

Short answer: No for phone calls. Nevada requires the consent of all parties to record a telephone call (Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620), but is one-party for in-person conversations (§ 200.650).

Plain-English summary

Nevada applies different rules to different media. For telephonic communications, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620 requires the consent of all parties or, where consent of one party is given, judicial authorization. The Nevada Supreme Court in Lane v. Allstate Insurance Co., 114 Nev. 1176 (1998), confirmed the all-party interpretation of § 200.620.

For in-person oral communications, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.650 imposes a different standard: it prohibits intrusion on the privacy of others, which has been read to allow a participant to record where the conversation does not occur in a setting reasonably expected to be private. The two-rule framework makes Nevada one of the more counter-intuitive jurisdictions: a face-to-face conversation may be recorded one-party, but a phone call may not.

Case law of note

No appellate decision in Nevada has materially reshaped the participant-recording rule in recent decades. Lower-court decisions exist but do not change the analytical framework set by the statute and by general federal precedent under § 2511.

Edge cases and special rules

  • In-person vs. phone. Different rule — one-party for in-person under § 200.650
  • Voicemail. Leaving a message creates the recording at the recipient’s direction; reviewing one’s own voicemail is not interception.
  • Vicarious consent. Several federal courts have recognized a parental-consent doctrine permitting a parent to consent on behalf of a minor child (Pollock v. Pollock, 154 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 1998)). State law varies; no controlling Nevada appellate decision on the question.
  • Law enforcement. Court-authorized intercepts are governed by a separate framework and are outside the scope of this page.
  • Cross-border calls. Where any participant is in an all-party state, treat the stricter rule as the safer default. See cross-border calls.

Penalties and remedies

Criminal: Category D felony for unauthorized telephonic recording under § 200.690.

Civil: Yes — § 200.690 provides actual and statutory damages.

Evidence: a recording made in violation of the Nevada statute is generally inadmissible in Nevada proceedings. Federal § 2515 separately bars use of unlawfully intercepted communications in federal proceedings.

Practical guidance

  • If you are recording an ordinary phone call: obtain audible consent from every party at the start of the call.
  • Suggested opening: See our consent script templates for jurisdiction-specific language.
  • If the other party objects: stop recording. Continued recording over an objection is a separate factual question that no consent statute helps you with.
  • What to keep: the date and time of the call, the parties’ phone numbers, a description of the consent given (express verbal, continued participation after notice, etc.), and the audio file itself.

Compare to

Resources for Nevada

Frequently asked questions

Is Nevada a one-party consent state?

No for phone calls. Nevada requires the consent of all parties to record a telephone call (Nev. Rev. Stat. § 200.620), but is one-party for in-person conversations (§ 200.650).

Can I record a phone call in Nevada without the other person knowing?

No. Recording a phone call in Nevada requires everyone’s consent. Announce the recording at the start of the call and get a verbal yes on the recording.

Does the same rule apply to in-person conversations in Nevada?

Different rule — one-party for in-person under § 200.650.

What is the penalty for illegally recording a call in Nevada?

Criminal: Category D felony for unauthorized telephonic recording under § 200.690. Civil: Yes — § 200.690 provides actual and statutory damages.

Can a phone recording be used as evidence in Nevada?

A recording made in violation of Nevada law is generally inadmissible in Nevada proceedings, and federal law (18 U.S.C. § 2515) bars unlawfully intercepted communications in federal proceedings. A lawfully made recording can be admissible, but it must still be authenticated and relevant — ask a lawyer before relying on one.

What if the other person on the call is in a different state?

When a call crosses state lines, courts may apply the stricter state’s law. If anyone on the call is in an all-party consent state such as California, Florida or Illinois, get everyone’s consent before recording. See cross-border calls.