Sackley v. Gorodezki

CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 18, 2022
Docket84083
StatusPublished

This text of Sackley v. Gorodezki (Sackley v. Gorodezki) 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
Sackley v. Gorodezki, (Neb. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

STUART SACKLEY, AN INDIVIDUAL; No. 84083 DOUGLAS DASILVA, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND SACKLEY FAMILY TRUST, STUART SACKLEY AS TRUSTEE, A FILED TRUST, Appellants, • FEB 1 8 2022 vs. ELIZA.% Pt BROWN CLERK OF PROC. COURT ILAN GORODEZKI, AN INDIVIDUAL, DEPU CLERK Res • ondent.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is an appeal from findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a final order resolving the claims between the parties after a trial. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Christy L. Craig, Judge. The order appealed from was entered March 30, 2021, with written notice of entry served electronically on April 9, 2021. Accordingly, the notice of appeal was due to be filed on or before May 10, 2021. NRCP 6; NRAP 4. Appellants filed the notice of appeal on January 10, 2022, well beyond the relevant appeal period, ostensibly pursuant to an "enlargement of time" granted to appellants by the district court on December 14, 2021. Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was untimely filed. Appellants have not opposed the motion to dismiss. This court concludes that appellants concede the merit of respondent's motion. See Foster v. Dingwall, 126 Nev. 56, 66, 227 P.3d 1042, 1049 (2010) (stating that this court may

'Appellants have also failed to file the docketing statement as SUPREME COURT required by this court's rules, NRAP 14, and its order of January 24, 2022. OF NEVADA

707 1947A afilVID 2-- as-(191-1 construe the failure to oppose a motion as an admission that the motion is meritorious). This court lacks jurisdiction over this untimely appeal. See Healy v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, 103 Nev. 329, 741 P.2d 432 (1987) (an untimely notice of appeal fails to vest jurisdiction in this court); Walker v. Scully, 99 Nev. 45, 46, 657 P.2d 94, 94 (1983) (the district court lacks authority to extend the time to file a notice of appeal). The motion to dismiss is granted, and this court ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.

J. Hardesty

Al;i$C4,0 J. Stiglich

J.

cc: Hon. Christy L. Craig, District Judge Spencer M. Judd Pintar Albiston LLP Eighth District Court Clerk

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

Related

Walker v. Scully
657 P.2d 94 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1983)
Foster v. Dingwall
227 P.3d 1042 (Nevada Supreme Court, 2010)
Healy v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft
741 P.2d 432 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Sackley v. Gorodezki, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sackley-v-gorodezki-nev-2022.