Opinion
No. 63033
03-13-2014
HAROLD D. HARSHMAN, Appellant, v. STATE OF NEVADA PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Respondent.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority.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 a state retirement benefits action for failure to properly serve process. Fifth Judicial District Court, Nye County; Robert W. Lane, Judge.
Proper person appellant filed suit against the State of Nevada Public Employment Retirement System (PERS), arguing that PERS violated his rights in creating a hostile work environment and in terminating his disability benefits. The district court dismissed appellant's complaint without prejudice because the complaint named PERS as a defendant and appellant had failed to timely serve the complaint arid summons on the Attorney General, or a person designated by the Attorney General to receive service, and on the person serving as PERS's administrative head. The district court denied appellant's subsequent motion for reconsideration.
Appellant seeks to appeal both the district court's order of dismissal and its denial of his motion for reconsideration. Upon review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for reconsideration. AA Primo Builders, LLC v. Washington, 126 Nev. ___, ___, 245 P.3d 1190, 1197 (2010) (noting that a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for an abuse of discretion where appealed with the underlying judgment).
This court reviews a district court's dismissal for failure to properly effect service of process for an abuse of discretion, Abreu v. Gilmer, 115 Nev. 308, 312-13, 985 P.2d 746, 749 (1999). On appeal, appellant argues that his rights were violated by PERS and other school district and state actors, but appellant does not argue that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the complaint for insufficient service. Consequently, we will not overturn the district court's order of dismissal. See Edwards v. Emperor's Garden Rest., 122 Nev. 317, 330 n.38, 130 P.3d 1280, 1288 n.38 (2006) (declining to consider claims when a proper person appellant failed to cogently argue or present supporting authority for the legal basis for his appeal). Further, we have reviewed the record on appeal and we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing appellant's complaint. Abreu, 115 Nev. at 312-13, 985 P.2d at 749. Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
Appellant's "Request for Automatic Stay," filed on February 24, 2014, is denied as moot.
--------
_________________, J.
Hardesty
_________________, J.
Douglas
_________________, J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. Robert W. Lane, District Judge
Harold. D. Harshman
Attorney General/Carson City
Nye County Clerk