Is Nevada a one-party or two-party consent state?
Nevada treats phone calls and in-person conversations differently. The Nevada Supreme Court has read its wiretap law to require all parties' consent to record a phone call, while recording an in-person conversation needs one participant's consent.
General information, not legal advice. Check the statute and talk to a lawyer about your situation.
Statute checked October 15, 2026
The law
- Rule
- A state where the consent rule depends on the situation
- Statute
- Nev. Rev. Stat. 200.620; 200.650 (statute text from Justia's copy of the state code), related section 1, related section 2
- Notes
- Phone calls and in-person conversations are treated differently. For phone calls, the statute allows interception only with one party's prior consent and an emergency where a court order is impractical (NRS 200.620); the RCFP guide reports that the Nevada Supreme Court has read this to require all parties' consent to record a call (Lane v. Allstate, 1998; Sharpe v. State, 2015). For in-person private conversations, recording is allowed if one of the people in the conversation authorizes it (NRS 200.650).
For businesses using an AI receptionist
AI receptionists usually record and transcribe calls. Announcing at the start of the call that it's recorded, and that the caller is speaking with an AI assistant, is the common way businesses handle callers from states with stricter rules.
Compare AI receptionists and check which ones announce recording and AI use.