JOHN JUNIOR ARD v. DAN CHANEY ROLAND WEEDON AND DEEANN GREGORY (2023)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a pro se appeal from district court orders of dismissal. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jacqueline M. Bluth, Judge.

Review of the notices of appeal and documents before this court in this matter reveals a jurisdictional defect. This court “may only consider appeals authorized by statute or court rule.” Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013). It does not appear that a final judgment appealable under NRAP 3A(b)(l) has been entered in the underlying district court action because the complaint in intervention remains pending.¹ See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (“[A] final judgment is one that disposes of all the issues presented in the case, and leaves nothing for the future consideration of the court, except for post-judgment issues such as attorney's fees and costs.”). And no other statute or court rule appears to authorize an appeal from the challenged orders. Accordingly, it appears this court lacks jurisdiction and

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.

Herndon, J.

Lee, J.

Parraguirre, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   An interlocutory order dismissing defendant DeeAnn Gregory was certified as final in this matter on August 31, 2023, and again on September 14, 2023. It appears Ms. Gregory was erroneously included as a respondent to this appeal challenging orders of dismissal regarding different defendants. Accordingly, the clerk shall remove Ms. Gregory as a respondent. The unopposed motion of Ms. Gregory's counsel to be removed from the service list is granted to the following extent. With the removal of Ms. Gregory as a respondent, her counsel will no longer be served with documents in this matter.