WILLIAM MCCANN v. PRESTIGE DEFAULT SERVICES LLC SERVICE ONE INC BSI MORTGAGE SERVICES CHALET SERIES III TRUST AND CABANA SERIES III TRUST (2023)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is an appeal from an order granting summary judgment. Ninth Judicial District Court, Douglas County; Nathan Tod Young, Judge.

Because it appeared that not all claims against all parties had been finally resolved, this court directed appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant and respondents have responded.¹

Appellant proposes that in addition to the summary judgment, he is also appealing an order setting aside a default, which he claims cures any jurisdictional defect. An order setting aside a default is not an appealable order. See Lindblom v. Prime Hosp. Corp., 120 Nev. 372, 374 n.1, 90 P.3d 1283, 1284 n.l (2004) (while an order setting aside a default judgment is appealable, an order setting aside entry of default is not an appealable order under NRAP 3A(b)).

Appellant does not address the issue of the outstanding claims against U.S. Bank Trust N.A., which were the essence of this court's order to show cause. Absent a final judgment resolving all claims against all parties, this court lacks jurisdiction. NRAP 3A(b)(1). See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000) (defining a final judgment as “one that disposes of all the issues presented in the case, and leaves nothing for the future consideration of the court, except for postjudgment issues such as attorney's fees and costs). In addition, respondents confirm that the district court has yet to enter a written order resolving the claims against U.S. Bank Trust N.A.

”[T]he burden rests squarely upon the shoulders of a party seeking to invoke our jurisdiction to establish, to our satisfaction, that this court does in fact have jurisdiction.” Moran v. Bonneville Square Assocs., 117 Nev. 525, 527, 25 P.3d 898, 899 (2001). Appellant has failed to demonstrate this court has jurisdiction in this appeal. Accordingly, this court

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.

Stiglich, C.J.

Cadish, J.

Pickering, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Appellant's motion for an extension of time to file “further response” to the Order to Show Cause is granted. The “further response” was filed on April 6, 2023.