Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

481 P.3d 1254

Estrada Vs. Warner

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided March 8, 2021

Nevada Supreme Court · decided 2021-03-08

Relies on First Interstate Bank of California v. H.C.T., Inc.

Decided 2021-03-08

       IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA


LARRY ESTRADA, AN INDIVIDUAL,                          No. 81642
                  Appellant,
             vs.
SHEILA A. WARNER,
                  Res • ondent.
                                                             FILED
                                                             MAR 0 8 2021




                     ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

            This is an appeal from a district court order granting
appellant's motion to set aside a default judgment but denying appellant's
motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and motion for forum non
conveniens. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; William D.
Kephart, Judge.
            Previously, this court entered an order to show cause directing
appellant to demonstrate this court's jurisdiction and show cause why the
appeal should not be dismissed. An order granting a motion to set aside a
default judgment is not an independently appealable order, see Estate of
Adams v. Fallini, 
132 Nev. 814
, 818, 
386 P.3d 621
, 624 (2016), and appellant
is not aggrieved by the decision. In addition, no appeal lies from an order
denying a motion to dismiss. See NRAP 3A(b) (designating orders and
judgments from which an appeal may be taken); see also First interstate
Bank v. H.C.T.. Inc., 108 Nev, 242, 250, 
828 P.2d 405, 410
 (1992).
            Appellant has responded and argues that this court should find
the challenged order appealable as "[a]n order changing or refusing to
change the place of triar as permitted by NRAP 3A(b)(6). Appellant argues
that he was compelled to seek dismissal because a Nevada court is unable
to change the place of trial to a foreign country; thus the only way to get the
matter to the allegedly proper forum is to dismiss the action so that it can
be refiled in the Philippines. Appellant does not describe a motion to change
venue; appellant filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied. Accordingly,
this court lacks jurisdiction over the challenged order, and
            ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.



                                                      J.
                         Cadish


        A                  , J.                                         J.
Pickering                                   Herndon




cc:   Chief Judge, Eighth Judicial District Court
      Eighth Judicial District Court, Department 19
      Paul M. Haire, Settlement Judge
      Gesund & Pailet, LLC
      Claggett & Sykes Law Firm
      Morris Law Center
      Eighth District Court Clerk




                                      2

/481/p3d/1254 · .json · Public domain