Wilmurth v. State of Nevada

Nevada Supreme Court

Wilmurth v. State of Nevada

387 P.2d 251, 79 Nev. 490, 1963 Nev. LEXIS 144

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedDecember 13, 1963

Docket4705

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 387 P.2d 251 (Wilmurth v. State of Nevada) 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

Wilmurth v. State of Nevada, 387 P.2d 251, 79 Nev. 490, 1963 Nev. LEXIS 144 (Neb. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

Per Curiam:

On December 4,1968 respondent, the State of Nevada, filed its motion herein to dismiss the appeal of appellants from an order dismissing the State of Nevada as a party defendant made and entered on the 10th day of June, 1963. Several grounds are stated in the motion for dismissal of the appeal. Only one need be considered.

Respondent State of Nevada maintains that an order dismissing one of several defendants is not an appeal-able order as it is not a final judgment. NRCP 72(b) specifies determinations from which an appeal may be taken, one of which is that an appeal may be taken from a final judgment in an action or proceeding commenced in the court in which the judgment is rendered. It is the contention of appellant that the order dismissing the State of Nevada as a party defendant is a final judgment within the meaning of this rule. This contention must be rejected.

NRCP 54(b) provides in part that when more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment upon one or more but less than all of the claims “only upon an *492 express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates less than all the claims shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims.”

The lower court in directing entry of judgment in favor of this movant on June 10,1963 did not make “an express determination that there is no just reason for delay,” as provided by NRCP 54(b). Therefore, the order of dismissal entered on June 10,1963 was not final. Tobin Packing Co. v. North American Car Corp., 2 Cir., 188 F.2d 158; Garbose v. George A. Giles Co., 1 Cir., 183 F.2d 513.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted without prejudice to the right of the appellants to present any grievance to this court after a final judgment on the merits in the court below.

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

OPINION

Per Curiam:

On December 4,1968 respondent, the State of Nevada, filed its motion herein to dismiss the appeal of appellants from an order dismissing the State of Nevada as a party defendant made and entered on the 10th day of June, 1963. Several grounds are stated in the motion for dismissal of the appeal. Only one need be considered.

Respondent State of Nevada maintains that an order dismissing one of several defendants is not an appeal-able order as it is not a final judgment. NRCP 72(b) specifies determinations from which an appeal may be taken, one of which is that an appeal may be taken from a final judgment in an action or proceeding commenced in the court in which the judgment is rendered. It is the contention of appellant that the order dismissing the State of Nevada as a party defendant is a final judgment within the meaning of this rule. This contention must be rejected.

NRCP 54(b) provides in part that when more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment upon one or more but less than all of the claims “only upon an *492 express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. In the absence of such determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates less than all the claims shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims.”

The lower court in directing entry of judgment in favor of this movant on June 10,1963 did not make “an express determination that there is no just reason for delay,” as provided by NRCP 54(b). Therefore, the order of dismissal entered on June 10,1963 was not final. Tobin Packing Co. v. North American Car Corp., 2 Cir., 188 F.2d 158; Garbose v. George A. Giles Co., 1 Cir., 183 F.2d 513.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted without prejudice to the right of the appellants to present any grievance to this court after a final judgment on the merits in the court below.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

387 P.2d 251, 79 Nev. 490, 1963 Nev. LEXIS 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilmurth-v-state-of-nevada-nev-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack