ALEXANDER KHALAF AND FAHIMA KHALAF REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST LLC v. SUAREZ (2025)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Respondent has moved to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction, pointing out that the appealed judgment does not resolve all of the claims against all of the defendants, such that no final, appealable judgment has been entered. In particular, he notes, defaults were taken against defendants Jason and Stephanie France, but no default judgment or other order resolving the claims against them has been entered. Respondent also points out that, although the claims against the rest of the defendants, appellants here, went to trial, the judgment expressly resolves only the claims against Anthem Realty Group. Finally, respondent points out that NRCP 54(b) certification of the judgment was not sought or granted.

In opposition, appellants assert that the trial concluded the claims against all appellants, and even if it did not, the judgment is final as to, and the appeal should be allowed to proceed against, Anthem Realty Group. Appellants argue that resolution of the claims in the trial essentially awarded respondent all he is entitled to for the entire incident, and the claims asserted against the Frances thus do not defeat appellate jurisdiction.

In Lee v. GNLV Corp., this court explained that an appealable, final judgment under NRAP 3A(b)(l) 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.” 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000). We have further noted that “[i]n the absence of a proper certification of finality, an interlocutory order dismissing fewer than all the parties cannot be challenged on appeal until a final judgment is entered in the action fully and finally resolving all the claims against all the parties.” Fernandez v. Infusaid Corp., 110 Nev. 187, 192, 871 P.2d 292, 295 (1994). Here, the judgment appealed from resolved the underlying action expressly against Anthem Realty Group only, and thus fewer than all of the parties. Additionally, the district court has not made an express finding that no just cause for delay exists and directed entry of a final judgment under NRCP 54(b). See Valley Bank of Nev. v. Ginsburg, 110 Nev. 440, 874 P.2d 729 (1994) (noting that a mere ruling, without an order formally dismissing the claims, does not finally resolve the claims for appellate purposes); KDI Sylvan Pools v. Workman, 107 Nev. 340, 342-43, 810 P.2d 1217, 1219 (1991) (discussing the need for formal resolution of claims). As a result, we lack jurisdiction. We grant respondent's motion and

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of this order, respondent's motion to suspend the briefing schedule is denied as moot.