From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holly v. Hawkins

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 26, 2013
No. 62389 (Nev. Mar. 26, 2013)

Opinion

No. 62389

03-26-2013

SETH EUGENE HOLLY, Appellant, v. SARAH MARIE HAWKINS, Respondent.


An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Our review of the documents before us reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, no appeal may be taken from a temporary protective order. See, e.g., In re Temporary Custody of Five Minors, 105 Nev. 441, 777 P.2d 901 (1989); Sugarman Co. v. Morse Bros., 50 Nev. 191, 255 P. 1010 (1927). Accordingly, as we lack jurisdiction, we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.

Wenote that appellant may challenge the temporary protective order and attorney fees in a writ petition. In light of this order, we deny as moot appellant's motion for a stay.

___________, J.

Gibbons

___________, J.
Douglas
___________, J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Mathew Harter, District Judge

Seth Eugene Holly

Rhonda K. Forsberg

Eighth District Court Clerk


Summaries of

Holly v. Hawkins

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 26, 2013
No. 62389 (Nev. Mar. 26, 2013)
Case details for

Holly v. Hawkins

Case Details

Full title:SETH EUGENE HOLLY, Appellant, v. SARAH MARIE HAWKINS, Respondent.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Mar 26, 2013

Citations

No. 62389 (Nev. Mar. 26, 2013)