IN RE: the GUARDIANSHIP OF: J. L. M. (2026)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Review of the notice of appeal and documents before this court reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, only an aggrieved party may appeal. NRAP 3A(a); Valley Bank of Nev. v. Ginsburg, 110 Nev. 440, 446, 874 P.2d 729, 734 (1994) (defining “aggrieved” for purposes of NRAP 3A(a)). Here, appellant, as the guardian of the estate of the protected minor, filed a petition to amend a November 11, 2025, district court order directing the deposit of proceeds from a California probate matter into the protected minor's blocked account. Appellant filed the petition on December 31, 2025, requesting the district court amend the order to reflect that “[a]ll funds from the related California probate case shall be deposited into the protected minor's blocked bank account held for the benefit of [the protected minor].” The district court granted appellant's petition on January 14, 2026, amending the November 11 order to comply with appellant's request. Appellant prevailed in the district court, and he is not aggrieved by the order that he challenges in this appeal. See Ford v. Showboat Operating Co., 110 Nev. 752, 756, 877 P.2d 546, 549 (1994) (“A party who prevailed in the district court and who does not wish to alter any rights of the parties arising from the judgment is not aggrieved by the judgment.”). We lack jurisdiction and

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.