Gomez v. Gomez Santana

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: August 11, 2022
• Docket: 83925
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

WILLY GOMEZ; EREZ BITTON, AND No. 83925 OASIS MOVING AND STORAGE, INC., D/B/A U TRUST MOVING, Appellants, FILE vs. GENARO GOMEZ SANTANA, AUG 1 1 2022 Res • ondent. ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK9F.SpPREME COURT BY D. Nt DEPUTY CLER

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND REFERRING COUNSEL TO THE STATE BAR OF NEVADA

This is an appeal from an order affirming the discovery commissioner's report and recommendations. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Carli Lynn Kierny, Judge. On May 13, 2022, this court entered an order conditionally imposing sanctions against attorneys Russell D. Chastain, Thornas E. McGrath, and Cheryl H. Wilson, counsel for appellant, for their failure to file the case appeal statement, the transcript request forrn, the docketing statement, and the opening brief and appendix within the time frames set by this court. This court directed Mr. Chastain, Mr. McGrath, and Ms. Wilson each to pay the $250 conditional sanction within 14 days and informed them that the sanctions would be automatically vacated if they filed the missing documents by May 27, 2022. Counsel were cautioned that failure to comply with this court's order or any other filing deadlines could result in the dismissal of this appeal and in counsel's referral to the State Bar for investigation pursuant to SCR 104-105 for violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct).

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

10) I947A • To date, none of the documents have been filed, and counsel has

not otherwise communicated with this court. We have repeatedly stated that we expect all appeals 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. Stctte, 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. Ernp't Sec. Dep't v. Weber, 100 Nev. 121, 123, 676 P.2d 1318, 1319 (1984). It is incumbent upon Mr. Chastain, Mr. McGrath, and Ms. Wilson, 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). Mr. Chastain, Mr. McGrath, and Ms. Wilson are "not at liberty to

disobey notices, orders, or any other directives issued by this court." Id. at 261 P.3d at 1085. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. NRAP 31(d). Because it appears that Mr. Chastain, Mr. McGrath, and Ms. Wilson's conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), we refer them 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. Finally, the $250 sanction imposed in our previous order is no

longer conditional and must be paid. Mr. Chastain, Mr. McGrath, and Ms. Wilson shall each have 7 days from the date of this order to pay $250 to the SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(01 I947A • s'S'..!••• 2 Supreme Court Law Library and provide the clerk of this court with proof of such paynient. It is so ORDERED.

/ dffL , J. A Hardesty

04(1,.‘i3L.0 , J. J. Stiglich Herndon

cc: Hon. Carli Lynn Kierny, District Judge Tyson & Mendes LLP Russell D. Chastain Thomas E. McGrath Cheryl H. Wilson De Castroverde Law Group Supreme Court Law Librarian Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Eighth District Court Clerk

101 1947A