In Re: Hillygus Family Trust

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: April 16, 2018
• Docket: 75150
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF THE HILLYGUS No. 75150 FAMILY TRUST, DATED AUGUST 17, 1993.

ROGER HILLYGUS, FILE Appellant, vs. k BROWN KAYCEE ZUSMAN; AND ROBIN RENAE RENWICK, 7 FPnCC .

dEPUTY CLERK Respondents. IN THE MATTER OF THE No. 75151 GUARDIANSHIP OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF SUSAN HILLYGUS, A PROTECTED PERSON.

ROGER HILLYGUS, Appellant, vs. KAYCEE ZUSMAN; AND ROBIN R ENAE RENWICK, Respondents.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEALS These are pro se appeals from a district court order entered in two separate district court cases holding appellant in contempt. Second Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Washoe County; Frances Doherty, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, it appears that the order 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. u. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). Appellant challenges an order entered after an SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(DI 1947A e - 11-13 1;

Tin I evidentiary hearing on an order to show cause why he should not he held in contempt for failure to comply with a prior order directing him to pay money to the Trustee. No statute or court rule provides for an appeal from an order that solely concerns contempt. See Pengilly v. Rancho Santa Fe Homeowners Ass'n„ 116 Nev. 646, 649, 5 P.3d 569, 571 (2000) (recognizing that a contempt order entered in an ancillary proceeding is not appealable). We conclude that we lack jurisdiction and we ORDER these appeals DISMISSED.

Part aguirre Stiglich

cc: Hon. Frances Doherty, District Judge, Family Court Division Roger Hillygus Todd L. Torvinen Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1.947A 2