489 P3D 917 - Wiman Vs. Refaely

        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA


 CHERI RENE WIMAN,                                      No. 82763
                   Appellant,
               vs.                                            FILED
 COTY REFAELY,
                   Respondent.                                   _JUL       2021

                                                           CLE          r          '
                     ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL                       _          ..       .

            This is an appeal from an interlocutory order. Eighth Judicial
District Court, Clark County; David M. Jones, Judge.

            Appellant challenges an order granting a motion to enforce a
settlement agreement and addressing related issues, but not dismissing the
underlying complaint. Because it appeared that this court lacked
jurisdiction, see Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC,

129 Nev. 343

301 P.3d 850

 (2013) (an order granting a motion to enforce a settlement agreement
is not a final judgment where it does not enter judgment in favor of a party
or otherwise resolve the pending claims), this court directed appellant to
show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed.
            In response, appellant asserts that the challenged order is
appealable as a final judgment, and provides this court with an order
certifying the order as final pursuant to NRCP 54(b).

           The challenged order does not resolve the claims asserted in the
• istrict court proceedings and expressly denies appellant's "Countermotion
o Enforce the Settlement Agreement and to Dismiss Case with Prejudice."
t is thus not appealable as a final judgment. See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116
 ev. 424, 426,

996 P.2d 416, 417

 (2000) (defining a final judgment); Valley
 ank of Nev., 110 Nev. at 446, 874 P.2d at 733-34 (concluding that the
•istrict court's order approving a settlement agreement was not a final,



                                                                            cvocii
                ppealable judgment because the parties claims were not dismissed or
                therwise resolved).
                           In addition, the order does not appear amenable to NRCP 54(b)

                ertification because the district court did not rnake an express
                letertnination that there is no just reason for delay. Aldabe v. Evans, 83
                Vev. 135,

425 P.2d 598

 (1967). And it appears that the claims asserted in
                ;he action are so closely related that this court must necessarily decide
                ssues pending below in order to decide the issues appealed.     Maliin v.

                Partners Insurance Exchange,

106 Nev. 606

797 P.2d 978

 (1990);
                Hallicrafters Co. u. Moore,

102 Nev. 526

728 P.2d 441

 (1986). Reviewing
                he matter at this stage of the proceedings could result in piecemeal
                itigation, defeating the purpose of NRCP 54(b). Accordingly, this court
                concludes that it lacks jurisdiction. An appeal may be taken from a final
                judgment resolving the claims asserted below. This court
                           ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.




                                                                    , C.J.
                                        Hardesty


                                                                Ai4CA4-.0
                Parraguirre                              Stiglich




                cc:   Hon. David M. Jones, District Judge
                      Ara H. Shirinian, Settlement Judge
                      Law Office of S. Don Bennion
                      Michael S. Strange & Associates, LLC
                      Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
      OF
   NEVADA


  1,I7A