IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

MARLENE REDMOND, No. 76374 Appellant, vs. DIGNITY HEALTH, D/B/A ST. ROSE DOMINICAN HEALTH-SAN MARTIN CAMPUS; AND HERMINIA DIOKNO, Respondents. MARLENE REDMOND, No. 76376 if Appellant, vs. DIGNITY HEALTH, D/B/A ST. ROSE DOMINICAN HEALTH-SAN MARTIN RED CAMPUS; AND HERMINIA DIOKNO, JUL 3 0 2018 Respondents. A. BROWN JP CCU

BY ORDER DISMISSING APPEALS PUTY CLERK

These are pro se appeals from an order denying appellant's motion for an evidentiary hearing for an attorney lien and from an order denying appellant's motion to discharge an attorney lien and motion to compel. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Douglas Smith, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals jurisdictional defects. Specifically, the notices of appeal are untimely filed under NRAP 4(a) because it appears that they were filed before the entry of a final written judgment, and are therefore of no effect. See NRAP 4(a)(1); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987) (explaining that the district court's oral pronouncement from the bench, the clerk's minute order, and even an unfiled written order cannot be appealed).

SUPREME COURT OF

I re 1 0 7 0 NEVADA

(01 I947A men Further, it appears that the order designated in the notice of appeal in Docket No. 76374 is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). No statute or court rule provides for an appeal from an order denying a motion for an evidentiary hearing. We conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we ORDER these appeals DISMISSED.

J. Pickering

J. Hardesty

cc: Hon. Douglas Smith, District Judge Marlene Redmond Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A azgatm