Hettinga v. Alan T. Nahoum, Inc.

Opinion

Supreme Court OF NEVADA

(0) 167A =e

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

WYLMINA E. HETTINGA, AN No. 84351 INDIVIDUAL, Appellant,

Vs. re ALAN T. NAHOUM, INC., A NEW fa Lie ne YORK CORPORATION,

Respondent.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying a motion for reconsideration and a countermotion for vexatious litigant determination. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, Judge.

Pro se appellant Wylmina Hettinga appeals an order denying a motion for reconsideration of default judgments entered against her co- defendants below, Pacific Almaden Investments, LLC and Coastal Benefits, LLC. Review of the documents before this court reveals a jurisdictional defect. Appellant is not aggrieved by the challenged default judgments against Pacific Almaden and Coastal because they do not affect any rights of appellant. See Valley Bank of Nev. v. Ginsburg, 110 Nev. 440, 446, 874 P.2d 729, 734 (1994) (defining an aggrieved party as one whose personal or property rights are substantially and adversely affected by a ruling of the district court). Therefore, this court concludes that appellant lacks standing to appeal. See NRAP 3A(a); Valley Bank, 110 Nev. at 446, 874 P.2d at 734 (this court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal where it is brought by

an aggrieved party). Additionally, an order denying reconsideration is not

2 2-123

appealable. See Arnold v. Kip, 123 Nev. 410, 417, 168 P.3d 1050, 1054 (2007). Accordingly, we ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

par beck, , J.

Hardesty

Herndon

ce: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Wylmina E. Hettinga Holley Driggs/Las Vegas Kighth District Court Clerk

Supreme Court oF Nevapa

(0) 167A