DOROTHY WEST v. KOHL INC (2026)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND REFERRING COUNSEL TO STATE BAR FOR INVESTIGATION

This is an appeal from multiple district court orders. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Kathleen M. Drakulich, Judge.

On January 8, 2026, this court entered an order striking appellant's docketing statement because it was deficient. That order directed appellant through her counsel, Charles R. Kozak, to correct the deficiency and re-file the docketing statement within 14 days. When Mr. Kozak did not timely file a corrected docketing statement, this court issued an order on February 20, 2026, directing him to file the document within 7 days or face sanctions. When Mr. Kozak again failed to comply, this court entered an order on March 16, 2026, conditionally imposing sanctions against Mr. Kozak, for failing to comply with this court's notices and orders. The order directed Mr. Kozak to pay the sum of $250 to the Supreme Court Law Library and provide this court with proof of such payment within 7 days. However, the sanction would be automatically vacated if Mr. Kozak filed the docketing statement within the same time period. If the docketing statement was not timely filed, the sanction would no longer be conditional and must be paid. This court cautioned that failure to comply with the order or any other filing deadlines could result in the dismissal of this appeal. See NRAP 14(c). Further, because it appeared that Mr. Kozak's conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), we cautioned that failure to comply with the order or any other filing deadlines could result in Mr. Kozak's referral to the State Bar of Nevada for investigation pursuant to SCR 104-105.

To date, Mr. Kozak has failed to pay the conditional sanction and file the docketing statement, or otherwise communicate with this court. Accordingly, we conclude that the sanction is no longer conditional. Mr. Kozak shall pay the sum of $250 to the Supreme Court Law Library within 7 days of the date of this order and provide proof of such payment within 14 days.

This court has repeatedly stated that all appeals are expected to be “pursued in a manner meeting high standards of diligence, professionalism, and competence.” Cuzdey v. State, 103 Nev. 575, 578, 747 P.2d 233, 235 (1987); accord Polk v. State, 126 Nev. 180, 184, 233 P.3d 357, 359 (2010); Barry v. Lindner, 119 Nev. 661, 671, 81 P.3d 537, 543 (2003); State, Nev. Emp't Sec. Dept. v. Weber, 100 Nev. 121, 123, 676 P.2d 1318, 1319 (1984). It is incumbent upon Mr. Kozak, as part of his professional obligations of competence and diligence to his clients, to know and comply with all applicable court rules. See RPC 1.1; RPC 1.3. These rules have been implemented to promote cost-effective, timely access to the courts; it is “imperative” that he follow these rules and timely comply with our directives. Weddell v. Stewart, 127 Nev. 645, 650, 261 P.3d 1080, 1084 (2011). Mr. Kozak is “not at liberty to disobey notices, orders, or any other directives issued by this court.” Id. at 652, 261 P.3d at 1085. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.

Finally, because it appears that his conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), this court refers Mr. Kozak to the State Bar of Nevada for investigation pursuant to SCR 104-105. Bar counsel shall, within 90 days of the date of this order, inform this court of the status or results of the investigation and any disciplinary proceedings in this matter.

It is so ORDERED.

Pickering, J.

Parraguirre, J.

Bell, J.