MICHAEL ROBERT MARTIN v. DANIELLE DENISE MARTIN DANIELLE PALMER (2024)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order appointing a parenting coordinator. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Division, Clark County; Heidi Almase, Judge.

Appellant Michael Martin and respondent Danielle Martin divorced in 2017. In a prior appeal from an order denying a motion to modify the divorce decree, we approved the district court's decision to appoint a parenting coordinator to assist the parties with making parenting decisions concerning their three children. See Martin v. Martin, No. 85323, 2023 WL 3055103 (Nev. Apr. 21, 2023) (Order Affirming in Part and Dismissing Appeal in Part). The district court then entered an order appointing a parenting coordinator and outlining the terms of that appointment. After the district court denied Michael's motion for relief from that order, Michael filed this appeal.

Our review of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, it appears that the district court order is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal when authorized by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 100 Nev. 207, 209, 678 P.2d 1152, 1153 (1984). No statute authorizes an appeal from an order appointing a parenting coordinator. And because the district court's order does not “finally establish[ ] or alter[ ] the custody of minor children,” NRAP 3A(b)(7), or affect the parties’ rights from the divorce decree, no court rule permits an appeal from the district court's order either. See Vargas v. J Morales Inc., 138 Nev. 384, 386, 510 P.3d 777, 779 (2022) (“To be appealable, a special order entered after final judgment ‘must be an order affecting the rights of some party to the action, growing out of the judgment previously-entered ․ affecting rights incorporated in the judgment.” ’ (quoting Gumm v. Mainor, 118 Nev. 912, 914, 59 P.3d 1220, 1221 (2002))). Accordingly, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

Stiglich, J.

Pickering, J.

Parraguirre, J.