nstrue the provisions of this subsection in favor of imposing sanctions in all appropriate situations. It is the intent of the Legislature that the judges of the district courts impose sanctions pursuant to this subsection in all appropriate situations to punish for and deter conduct which is not undertaken in good faith because such conduct overburdens limited judicial resources, hinders the timely resolution of meritorious claims and increases the costs of engaging in business and providing professional services to the public. (Added to NRS by 2002 Special Session, 8; A 2003, 3478) NRS 41A.085 Recommendation of settlement for amount of limits of policy of insurance: When authorized; insurer to pay for opinion of independent counsel upon request. 1. In an action for damages for medical malpractice or dental malpractice in which the defendant is insured pursuant to a policy of insurance covering the liability of the defendant for a breach of his professional duty toward a patient: (a) At any settlement conference, the judge may recommend that the action be settled for the limits of the policy of insurance. (b) If the judge makes the recommendation described in paragraph (a), the defendant is entitled to obtain from independent counsel an opinion letter explaining the rights of, obligations of and potential consequences to the defendant with regard to the recommendation. The insurer shall pay the independent counsel to provide the opinion letter described in this paragraph, except that the insurer is not required to pay more than $1,500 to the independent counsel to provide the opinion letter. 2. The section does not: (a) Prohibit the plaintiff from making any offer of settlement. (b) Require an insurer to provide or pay for independent counsel for a defendant except as expressly provided in this section. (Added to NRS by 2003, 3372) NRS 41A.097 Limitation of actions; tolling of limitation. 1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, an action for injury or death against a provider of health care may not be commenced more than 4 years after the date of injury or 2 years after the plaintiff discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered the injury, whichever occurs first, for: (a) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring before October 1, 2002, based upon alleged professional negligence of the provider of health care; (b) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring before October 1, 2002, from professional services rendered without consent; or (c) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring before October 1, 2002, from error or omission in practice by the provider of health care. 2. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 3, an action for injury or death against a provider of health care may not be commenced more than 3 years after the date of injury or 1 year after the plaintiff discovers or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered the injury, whichever occurs first, for: (a) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring on or after October 1, 2002, based upon alleged professional negligence of the provider of health care; (b) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring on or after October 1, 2002, from professional services rendered without consent; or (c) Injury to or the wrongful death of a person occurring on or after October 1, 2002, from error or omission in practice by the provider of health care. 3. This time limitation is tolled for any period during which the provider of health care has concealed any act, error or omission upon which the action is based and which is known or through the use of reasonable diligence should have been known to him. 4. For the purposes of this section, the parent, guardian or legal custodian of any minor child is responsible for exercising reasonable judgment in determining whether to prosecute any cause of action limited by subsection 1 or 2. If the parent, guardian or custodian fails to commence an action on behalf of that child within the prescribed period of limitations, the child may not bring an action based on the same alleged injury against any provider of health care upon the removal of his disability, except that in the case of: (a) Brain damage or birth defect, the period of limitation is extended until the child attains 10 years of age. (b) Sterility, the period of limitation is extended until 2 years after the child discovers the injury. (Added to NRS by 1971, 366; A 1975, 407; 1977, 857, 954, 1082; 1985, 2011; 1989, 424; 1991, 1131; 1993, 2224; 1995, 2350; 1999, 5; 2001, 1107; 2002 Special Session, 8; 2004 initiative petition, Ballot Question No. 3) NRS 41A.100 Required evidence; exceptions; rebuttable presumption of negligence. 1. Liability for personal injury or death is not imposed upon any provider of medical care based on alleged negligence in the performance of that care unless evidence consisting of expert medical testimony, material from recognized medical texts or treatises or the regulations of the licensed medical facility wherein the alleged negligence occurred is presented to demonstrate the alleged deviation from the accepted standard of care in the specific circumstances of the case and to prove causation of the alleged personal injury or death, except that such evidence is not required and a rebuttable presumption that the personal injury or death was caused by negligence arises where evidence is presented that the personal injury or death occurred in any one or more of the following circumstances: (a) A foreign substance other than medication or a prosthetic device was unintentionally left within the body of a patient following surgery; (b) An explosion or fire originating in a substance used in treatment occurred in the course of treatment; (c) An unintended burn caused by heat, radiation or chemicals was suffered in the course of medical care; (d) An injury was suffered during the course of treatment to a part of the body not directly involved in the treatment or proximate thereto; or (e) A surgical procedure was performed on the wrong patient or the wrong organ, limb or part of a patient’s body. 2. Expert medical testimony provided pursuant to subsection 1 may only be given by a provider of medical care who practices or has practiced in an area that is substantially similar to the type of practice engaged in at the time of the alleged negligence. 3. As used in this section, “provider of medical care” means a physician, dentist, registered nurse or a licensed hospital as the employer of any such person. (Added to NRS by 1975, 406; A 1977, 955; 1985, 1754; 1997, 1219; 1999, 5; 2002 Special Session, 9) NRS 41A.110 Consent of patient: When conclusively established. A physician licensed to practice medicine under the provisions of chapter 630 of NRS, or a dentist licensed to practice dentistry under the provisions of chapter 631 of NRS, has conclusively obtained the consent of a patient for a medical, surgical or dental procedure, as appropriate, if he has done the following: 1. Explained to the patient in general terms without specific details, the procedure to be undertaken; 2. Explained to the patient alternative methods of treatment, if any, and their general nature; 3. Explained to the patient that there may be risks, together with the general nature and extent of the risks involved, without enumerating such risks; and 4. Obtained the signature of the patient to a statement containing an explanation of the procedure, alternative methods of treatment and risks involved, as provided in this section. (Added to NRS by 1975, 408; A 1997, 1219; 1999, 5) NRS 41A.120 Consent of patient: When implied. In addition to the provisions of chapter 129 of NRS and any other instances in which a consent

Vegas Law