Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr.

Nevada Supreme Court

Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr.

Nevada Supreme Court·Decided April 14, 2017·No. 72715·Unpublished

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

MARCELL WILLIAMS, No. 72715 Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; AND RENEE BAKER, WARDEN, MED Respondents.

B 5thPU

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is a pro se appeal from an order denying appellant's motion for summary judgment, denying defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment, denying a motion to file exhibits, granting a motion to strike, and denying leave to amend the complaint. Seventh Judicial District Court, White Pine County; Gary Fairman, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, the notice of appeal appears to be untimely filed under NRAP 4(a) because it appears that it was prematurely filed, before the entry of a final written judgment, and is therefore of no effect. See NRAP 4(a)(1); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987). The district court specifically held that appellant has established genuine issues of material fact that must be litigated, and an order denying summary judgment is not a final judgment. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Dist. Ct., 125 Nev. 449, 454, 215 P.3d 697,

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 700 (2009) (citing GES, Inc. v. Corbitt, 117 Nev. 265, 268, 21 P.3d 11, 13 (2001)). Accordingly, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

Douglas

J.

cc: Hon. Gary Fairman, District Judge Marcell Williams Attorney General/Carson City White Pine County Clerk

(0) 1€1174 cierp. 2

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

MARCELL WILLIAMS, No. 72715 Appellant, vs. THE STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; AND RENEE BAKER, WARDEN, MED Respondents.

B 5thPU

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is a pro se appeal from an order denying appellant's motion for summary judgment, denying defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment, denying a motion to file exhibits, granting a motion to strike, and denying leave to amend the complaint. Seventh Judicial District Court, White Pine County; Gary Fairman, Judge. Our review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, the notice of appeal appears to be untimely filed under NRAP 4(a) because it appears that it was prematurely filed, before the entry of a final written judgment, and is therefore of no effect. See NRAP 4(a)(1); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987). The district court specifically held that appellant has established genuine issues of material fact that must be litigated, and an order denying summary judgment is not a final judgment. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Dist. Ct., 125 Nev. 449, 454, 215 P.3d 697,

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 700 (2009) (citing GES, Inc. v. Corbitt, 117 Nev. 265, 268, 21 P.3d 11, 13 (2001)). Accordingly, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

Douglas

J.

cc: Hon. Gary Fairman, District Judge Marcell Williams Attorney General/Carson City White Pine County Clerk

(0) 1€1174 cierp. 2

Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr., (Neb. 2017).

Pincite

Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr. (Williams v. State, Dep't of Corr.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related