Opinion
No. 60984
04-12-2013
MARTIN CENTENO; AND RICARDO FOJAS, Appellants, v. MAVERICK VALLEY PROPERTIES LLC; CLARK COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE; AND CLARK COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, Respondents.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
This is a proper person appeal from a district court order dismissing appellants' complaint and expunging a lis pendens in a real property action. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; James M. Bixler, Judge.
Appellants Martin Centeno and Ricardo Fojas filed a complaint in the district court seeking to quiet title to a certain property. Respondents moved to dismiss the complaint. The district court dismissed appellants' complaint on the basis that appellants were attempting to represent the rights of the Criollo Family Trust, which appellants claimed had obtained title to the subject property through a homeowners' association foreclosure sale. This appeal followed.
Appellants have filed an unopposed motion seeking leave to file an amended proper person appeal statement, contending that a page was inadvertently omitted from their initial appeal statement. Having reviewed the motion, we grant it and direct the clerk of this court to detach from the motion and file the amended proper person appeal statement provisionally received in this court on August 9, 2012. As for appellants' motion for judicial notice and to amend the caption, we conclude that the motion does not warrant relief, and we deny the motion.
The district court concluded that appellants, who are not attorneys, could not bring claims on behalf of the Criollo Family Trust. We agree. A nonlawyer may not represent a trust in this or any other Nevada court. Salman v. Newell, 110 Nev. 1333, 1336, 885 P.2d 607, 608 (1994) (observing that no statute or rule permits a nonlawyer to represent an entity and concluding that an entity cannot proceed in proper person). As appellants' claims were brought for purposes of vindicating the trust's rights, and did not involve the appellants' personal rights, the district court properly dismissed the complaint.
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Because we affirm the district court's dismissal on this basis, we do not address the parties' remaining arguments.
--------
________________, J.
Hardesty
________________, J.
Parraguirre
________________, J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. James M. Bixler, District Judge
Martin Centeno
Ricardo Fojas
Clark County District Attorney
Hutchison & Steffen, LLC Eighth District Court Clerk