Nevada Supreme Court decision (August 7, 2014).
After homeowners found allegedly defective plumbing parts in their residences, they provided a prelitigation notice (required by NRS Chapter 40) to the general contractor / developer, who then forwarded the notice to numerous subcontractors and suppliers that were involved in the construction project.
When the issues were not resolved, the homeowners filed a lawsuit against the general contractor / developer, who in turn, filed third-party complaints against numerous subcontractors . One of the subcontractors, who happened to be a supplier, then filed a fourth-party complaint against another supplier that had not first been provided with a pre-litigation notice and opportunity to repair. The district court found that the pre-litigation notice was required to be given before the filing of the fourth-party complaint and stayed the proceedings so that the notice could be given. The homeowners challenged the district court ruling by filing a petition for a writ of mandamus.
The reviewing court found in favor of the petitioning homeowners and ruled that NRS Chapter 40 requires a contractor to forward notices of defects to subcontractors and suppliers or forgo suit against those subcontractors and suppliers, but the statutes do not require either the homeowners or the subcontractors to provide the prelitigation notice to another subcontractor , supplier, or design professional prior to commencing or adding an action against them.
See case decision: Barrett et al. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of the State of Nevada etc et al.