RIAN v. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION MTC (2020)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Initial review of the docketing statement revealed a potential jurisdictional defect. It appeared that the challenged order was not substantively appealable. Although appellant stated in the docketing statement that the order is appealable as a final judgment, see NRAP 3A(b)(1), the order did not appear to resolve any claims. It thus did not appear appealable as a final judgment. See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (defining a final judgment as one that resolves all claims against all parties in an action and leaves nothing for the court's future consideration except post-judgment issues). Accordingly, this court ordered appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

In response, appellant seems to contend that the order is an appealable final judgment because it resolves a substantive issue. Alternatively, appellant contends that the appeal should be treated as a petition for a writ of mandamus.

The order denying the motion for reconsideration does not resolve appellant's petition for participation in the foreclosure mediation program. Thus, it does not resolve all claims in the case and is not appealable as a final judgment. And no other statute or court rule appears to authorize an appeal from the challenged order. See Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013) (this court “may only consider appeals authorized by statute or court rule”). Accordingly, this court lacks jurisdiction and this appeal is dismissed. Appellant's alternative request to treat this appeal as a petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. Appellant may file a petition for a writ of mandamus in accordance with NRAP 21, if deemed warranted.

It is so ORDERED.