Nevada statutorily recognizes the rights of merchants to prevent theft and shoplifting and to take reasonable actions against persons on their premises pursuant to NRS 597.850.
"3. Any merchant who has reason to believe that merchandise has been wrongfully taken by a person and that the merchant can recover the merchandise by taking the person into custody and detaining the person may, for the purpose of attempting to effect such recovery or for the purpose of informing a peace officer of the circumstances of such detention, take the person into custody and detain the person, on the premises, in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable length of time. A merchant is presumed to have reason to believe that merchandise has been wrongfully taken by a person and that the merchant can recover the merchandise by taking the person into custody and detaining the person if the merchant observed the person concealing merchandise while on the premises. Such taking into custody and detention by a merchant does not render the merchant criminally or civilly liable for false arrest, false imprisonment, slander or unlawful detention unless the taking into custody and detention are unreasonable under all the circumstances. (emphasis added)."
The key word in this statute is "reasonable", which is a question of fact. In K-Mart Corp. v. Washington, 109 Nev. 1180 (1993), the Nevada Supreme Court clarified the necessity that the methods and mechanisms used by the store must be reasonable. Even where a merchant has probable cause to detain a customer, he or she may still be denied protection of the statute if it is shown the detention was unreasonable, such as detaining a suspect for longer than necessary, being unnecessarily rude or using excessive force. Based upon the description of the incident, acts such as smacking your wife's cellular phone do not appear reasonably related to the recovery of presumably stolen merchandise.
Answered on Nov 18th, 2013 at 1:25 PM