Pearl v. Pearl (Child Custody)

CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedMay 19, 2017
Docket72620
StatusUnpublished

This text of Pearl v. Pearl (Child Custody) (Pearl v. Pearl (Child Custody)) 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.

Bluebook
Pearl v. Pearl (Child Custody), (Neb. 2017).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ANTHONY PEARL, No. 72620 Appellant, vs. ALEXANDRIA PEARL, FILE Respondent. MAY 1 9 2017 El-V/43E111 CLERK F. SUPREME COURT

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR REMAND AND DISMISSING APPEAL This is an appeal from a district court post-decree order entered• in an action for divorce. Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Clark County; Jennifer Elliott, Judge. Appellant has filed a motion to remand this matter to the district court and dismiss this appeal pursuant to Foster v. Dingwall, 126 Nev. 49, 228 P.3d 453 (2010), and Huneycutt v. Huneycutt, 94 Nev. 79, 575 P.2d 585 (1978). Respondent has filed a non-opposition to the motion. Attached to the motion is a district court order certifying that, upon remand, the district court would ask an evaluator to investigate the current custodial arrangement. In particular, the evaluator would be asked to interview individuals, including the parties to this appeal and their minor children, and advise the court in regard to the current custodial arrangement. Further, the district court certified that, upon remand, it would be inclined to vacate its decision in regard to child support and reopen discovery on this issue. Cause appearing, we grant the motion. We remand this matter to the district court pursuant to its certification, and we dismiss this appeal. This dismissal is without prejudice to the parties' right to file SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A a motion to reinstate this appeal if the district court declines to grant the requested relief. Any such motion shall be filed within 60 days of the district court's order declining to grant the requested relief? It is so ORDERED.

Hardesty

Al4LSCIA , J. V Parraguirre Stiglich

cc: Hon. Jennifer Elliott, District Judge, Family Court Division Ara H. Shirinian, Settlement Judge The Jimmerson Law Firm, P.0 Mushkin & Rosenblum, Chartered Eighth District Court Clerk

'If the district court grants the requested relief, and a new order is entered as a result of the renewed district court proceedings, any party aggrieved by the new order may file a notice of appeal from that order. See NRAP 3A; NRAP 4.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A en 2

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Huneycutt v. Huneycutt
575 P.2d 585 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1978)
Foster v. Dingwall
228 P.3d 453 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Pearl v. Pearl (Child Custody), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearl-v-pearl-child-custody-nev-2017.