Rosete v. Weibel

Nevada Supreme Court

Rosete v. Weibel

Opinion

SupREME Court OF NeEvaDa Ha) IMT A -SetteSee IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA CAROLINE ROSETE, AN INDIVIDUAL, No. 84092 Appellant, Vs. asc MARIA JOY WEIBEL, AN FILED INDIVIDUAL, Respondent. AUS 49 2022 ELIZAGETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT \ BY : DEPUTY CLERK ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a final order granting summary judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, Judge. The challenged district court order was filed on December 6, 2021. Written notice of entry was served on appellant electronically on December 6, 2021; therefore, the notice of appeal was due by January 5, 2022. See NRCP 6. Appellant filed the notice of appeal on January 11, 2022, 6 days after the expiration of the 30 days provided by NRAP 4(a)(1). Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely, and the parties briefed the jurisdictional issue. Because the parties raised factual discrepancies regarding whether the notice of entry had been served at the correct e-mail address for appellant’s counsel, this court remanded this appeal to the district court for the limited purpose of determining the factual dispute. See Zugel by Zugel v. Miller, 99 Nev. 100, 100, 659 P.2d 296, 297 (1983). The district court has transmitted its order to this court and has concluded that written notice of entry of the order appealed from was served on appellant's counsel at his “valid and proper” e-mail address that was to be utilized for the 22-PSITIO purposes of e-service. Further, the district court found that appellant's counsel conceded that he was properly served by mail and e-mail. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was untimely filed. An untimely notice of appeal fails to vest jurisdiction in this court. Healy v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, 103 Nev. 329, 741 P.2d 432 (1987). This court lacks jurisdiction, and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.! S Lor? oS. Silver e (Chi ss Cadish Preboa tiny od. Pickering cc. Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Charles K. Hauser, Settlement Judge Sekhon & O'Bryant David J. Winterton & Associates, Ltd. Kighth District Court Clerk \Respondent’s motion to dismiss is denied as moot. SuPREME CouRT OF NEVADA Wh [META ebhre

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA CAROLINE ROSETE, AN INDIVIDUAL, No. 84092 Appellant, vs. MARIA JOY WEIBEL, AN INDIVIDUAL, Respondent. AUG 1 9 2022 ELIZASETH A. BROWN CLERK OF WPREME COURT RY DEPUTY CLERK ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a final order granting summary judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, Judge. The challenged district court order was filed on December 6, 2021. Written notice of entry was served on appellant electronically on December 6, 2021; therefore, the notice of appeal was due by January 5, 2022. See NRCP 6. Appellant filed the notice of appeal on January 11, 2022, 6 days after the expiration of the 30 days provided by NRAP 4(a)(1). Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely, and the parties briefed the jurisdictional issue. Because the parties raised factual discrepancies regarding whether the notice of entry had been served at the correct e-mail address for appellant's counsel, this court remanded this appeal to the district court for the limited purpose of determining the factual dispute. See Zugel by Zugel v. Miller, 99 Nev. 100, 100, 659 P.2d 296, 297 (1983). The district court has transmitted its order to this court and has concluded that written notice of entry of the order appealed from was served on appellant's counsel at his "valid and proper" e-mail address that was to be utilized for the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA -,2594i (0 nt's purposes of e-service. Further, the district court found that appella counsel conceded that he was properly served by mail and e-mail. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was untimely filed. An untimely notice of appeal fails to vest jurisdiction in this court. Healy u. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, 103 Nev. 329, 741 P.2d 432 (1987). This court lacks jurisdiction, and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED 1 1 /4..14A/Le ) Silver Cadish idegA. Pickering cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Charles K. Hauser, Settlement Judge Sekhon & O'Bryant David J. Winterton & Associates, Ltd. Eighth District Court Clerk 'Respondent's motion to dismiss is denied as moot. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 P-4-17A

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

CAROLINE ROSETE, AN INDIVIDUAL, No. 84092 Appellant, vs. MARIA JOY WEIBEL, AN INDIVIDUAL, Respondent. AUG 1 9 2022 ELIZASETH A. BROWN CLERK OF WPREME COURT RY DEPUTY CLERK

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is an appeal from a final order granting summary judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, Judge. The challenged district court order was filed on December 6, 2021. Written notice of entry was served on appellant electronically on December 6, 2021; therefore, the notice of appeal was due by January 5, 2022. See NRCP 6. Appellant filed the notice of appeal on January 11, 2022, 6 days after the expiration of the 30 days provided by NRAP 4(a)(1). Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely, and the parties briefed the jurisdictional issue. Because the parties raised factual discrepancies regarding whether the notice of entry had been served at the correct e-mail address for appellant's counsel, this court remanded this appeal to the district court for the limited purpose of determining the factual dispute. See Zugel by Zugel v. Miller, 99 Nev. 100, 100, 659 P.2d 296, 297 (1983). The district court has transmitted its order to this court and has concluded that written notice of entry of the order appealed from was served on appellant's counsel at his "valid and proper" e-mail address that was to be utilized for the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

-,2594i (0 nt's purposes of e-service. Further, the district court found that appella counsel conceded that he was properly served by mail and e-mail. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was untimely filed. An untimely notice of appeal fails to vest jurisdiction in this court. Healy u. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, 103 Nev. 329, 741 P.2d 432 (1987). This court lacks jurisdiction, and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED 1

1 /4..14A/Le ) Silver

Cadish

idegA. Pickering

cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Charles K. Hauser, Settlement Judge Sekhon & O'Bryant David J. Winterton & Associates, Ltd. Eighth District Court Clerk

'Respondent's motion to dismiss is denied as moot. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 P-4-17A

Reference

Status
Published