Luitel v. Parajuli-Luitel (Child Custody)

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: May 1, 2017
• Docket: 72815
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

GOVINDA LUITEL, No. 72815 e" Appellant, vs. LILA PARAJULI-LUITEL, Respondent. GOVINDA LUITEL, No. 72816 Appellant, vs. LILA PARAJULI-LUITEL, FILED Resoonden MAY 0 1 2017 E117.ABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT

ORDER DISMISSING APPEALS A.CA DEPUTY gLE M Kt-

These are pro se appeals from a divorce decree and an order extending a temporary protective order. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; Denise L. Gentile, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals jurisdictional defects. Specifically, it appears that the notice of appeal was prematurely filed, before entry of a final written divorce decree, and is therefore of no effect. See NRAP 4(a)(1). A district court's oral pronouncement from the bench, a minute order, and even an unfiled written order do not definitively resolve a disputed matter and cannot be appealed. See Rust v. Clark Cty, School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987). In addition, the order extending a temporary protective 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). Because no statute or

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A e 0-1112.57 court rule provides for an appeal from an order extending a temporary protective order, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction and we ORDER these appeals DISMISSED.

J.

Pickering OPekliA J.

cc: Hon. Denise L. Gentile, District Judge, Family Court Division Govinda Luitel Law Offices of Robert L. Hempen II Eighth District Court Clerk

e 2 (0) 1947A