Saticoy Bay LLC Ser. 3884 v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: January 22, 2016
• Docket: 65450
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SATICOY BAY LLC SERIES 3884 No. 65450 SQUIRREL, Appellant, vs. FILED WELLS FARGO BANK, NA., JAN 2.2 2016 Re SD ondent. TRAC E K. 4 DEMAN

• 01 4; A°

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

This is an appeal from a district court order denying a preliminary injunction in a quiet title action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Stefany Miley, Judge. On August 7, 2013, appellant Saticoy Bay filed a complaint in the district court seeking to quiet title to the subject property and seeking an injunction. Respondent Wells Fargo filed a motion to dismiss, which the district court granted on November 7, 2013. Then, on March 18, 2014, over four months after the district court dismissed Saticoy Bay's action, Saticoy Bay purported to file a motion for a preliminary injunction as to the same case the district court had dismissed.' The district court denied Saticoy Bay's motion for a preliminary injunction, determining that there was no likelihood of success on the merits. Saticoy Bay appealed.

'We note that the record contains no indication of any attempt to reconsider or to set aside the dismissal before the motion for a preliminary injunction was filed.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(01 1947A oe Our review of this appeal reveals a jurisdictional defect. We note that no timely appeal was taken from the motion to dismiss, see NRAP 4(a)(1) (providing thirty days to appeal), which was a final judgment disposing of the case on its merits, see Emerson v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of State, ex rel. County of Clark, 127 Nev. 672, 677, 263 P.3d 224, 227 (2011) ("We have previously held that jurisdiction over matters related to the merits of a case terminates upon dismissal."). Additionally, no intervening action was taken to reopen this case. See, e.g. NRCP 60(b) (providing relief from judgment). Thus, the district court had no jurisdiction to consider the motion for a preliminary injunction, which was, at best, a fugitive document as to a closed case. Consequently, this court has no jurisdiction over the case. See Nev. Const. art. 6, § 4 (limiting the Nevada Supreme Court's jurisdiction t6 appeals in civil cases arising in the district courts and granting the power to issue writs).

2 (0) 1947A cer> Accordingly, we are precluded from considering this appeal, and we ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

Parraguirre

/c4Je J. Hardesty

"Rao\ J. HH

Gibbons

J.

cc: Hon. Stefany Miley, District Judge Law Offices of Michael F. Bohn, Ltd. Snell & Wilmer, LLP/Tucson Snell & Wilmer, LLP/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA