Hurd v. Opipari
This text of Hurd v. Opipari (Hurd v. Opipari) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
KYMBERLIE JOY HURD, No. 84784 Appellant, vs. FILED MARIO OPIPARI, Respondent. JUN 1 Û 2022
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
This is a pro se appeal from an order denying appellant's motion to set aside pretrial emergency orders regarding visitation and custody. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; Bill Henderson, Judge. The order designated in the notice of appeal is not substantively appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). No statute or court rule allows for an appeal from the designated order. See generally In re Temporary Custody of Five Minor Children, 105 Nev. 441, 777 P.2d 901 (1989) (stating that no appeal may be taken from a temporary order subject to periodic mandatory review). This court lacks jurisdiction, and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.
, J. Piekm , Pickering
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) I947A Z2-18911 cc: Hon. Bill Henderson, District Judge, Family Court Division Kymberlie Joy Hurd Crome Law Firm Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEvACIA 2 (01 I947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hurd v. Opipari, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurd-v-opipari-nev-2022.