From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holmes v. Miller

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Jan 6, 2022
501 P.3d 431 (Nev. 2022)

Opinion

No. 84005

01-06-2022

Wilbert Roy HOLMES, Appellant, v. Ernest MILLER; and Capucine Yolanda Holmes, Respondents.

Wilbert Roy Holmes Ernest Miller Heaton Fontano, Ltd.


Wilbert Roy Holmes

Ernest Miller

Heaton Fontano, Ltd.

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Review of the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a jurisdictional defect. Specifically, appellant fails to identify any appealable order. To the extent appellant wishes to challenge findings from a prove up hearing possibly held December 21, 2021, no written order has been filed. Before a written order is signed and entered by the court, any notice of appeal is prematurely filed 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) (explaining that the district court's oral pronouncement from the bench, the clerk's minute order, and even an unfiled written order cannot be appealed). This court lacks jurisdiction and

ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.


Summaries of

Holmes v. Miller

Supreme Court of Nevada.
Jan 6, 2022
501 P.3d 431 (Nev. 2022)
Case details for

Holmes v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:Wilbert Roy HOLMES, Appellant, v. Ernest MILLER; and Capucine Yolanda…

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada.

Date published: Jan 6, 2022

Citations

501 P.3d 431 (Nev. 2022)