Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
DRIBBLE DUNK, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED COMPANY AND ALL NET LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Appellants, v. NEXT STEP VENTURE LTD., AN ANGUILLA INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS CORPORATION, Respondent.
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND REFERRING COUNSEL TO STATE BAR FOR INVESTIGATION
This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to set aside a default judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Mark R. Denton, Judge.
On April 1, 2026, this court entered an order reinstating briefing. Among other things, that order directed appellants, through their counsel, Valerie L. Del Grosso and Alisa Joy Steinhauer, to file and serve a transcript request form or certificate that no transcripts will be requested by April 15, 2026. Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer failed to comply. Therefore, on April 17, 2026, this court entered an order instructing Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer to file a transcript request form or certificate that no transcripts are being requested by April 24, 2026. The April 17 order cautioned that failure to comply could result in the imposition of sanctions. When Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer again failed to comply, this court entered an order on May 4, 2026, conditionally imposing sanctions against Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer for failing to comply with this court's orders. The order directed Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer to each 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 Ms. Del Grosso and/or Ms. Steinhauer filed the transcript request form or certificate that no transcripts are being requested within the same time period. If the transcript request form 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 9(a)(10), and in their referral to the State Bar for investigation.
To date, Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer have failed to pay the conditional sanction, file the transcript request form or certificate that no transcripts are requested, or otherwise communicate with this court. Accordingly, we conclude that the sanction is no longer conditional. Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer shall each 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 Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer, as part of their professional obligations of competence and diligence to their 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 they follow these rules and timely comply with our directives. Weddell v. Stewart, 127 Nev. 645, 650, 261 P.3d 1080, 1084 (2011). Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer are “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 Ms. Del Grosso's and Ms. Steinhauer's conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), this court refers Ms. Del Grosso and Ms. Steinhauer 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.
Stiglich, J.
Cadish, J.
Lee, J.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 90984
Decided: May 18, 2026
Court: Supreme Court of Nevada.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)