Percival v. Balangue ( 2014 )

 Respondents have moved to dismiss this appeal for lack of
jurisdiction, asserting that it was prematurely filed before the district
court resolved all claims pertaining to all the parties in the case below and
that the district court has yet to enter a written order resolving appellants'
motion for relief from the default judgment and for reconsideration.
Appellants oppose the motion, mostly arguing the merits of their appeal
but also asserting that (1) the default judgment, which is not certified as
final under NRCP 54(b), and which does not resolve claims against
defendant/appellant Philip Percival, is final and appealable; and (2) the
lack of a written order denying their post-judgment motion for relief from
thefl judgment and for reconsideration is irrelevant. Respondents have
filed a reply, again pointing out that no final judgment has been entered.
Having considered the parties' arguments, we grant the
motion to dismiss. All claims against defendant/appellant Philip Percival
undisputedly remain pending in the district court and the default
judgment as to the remaining defendants/appellants was not certified as
final under NRCP 54(b). The default judgment is therefore not a final,
appealable judgment. See NRAP 3A(b)(1); Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev.
424, 996 P.2d 416 (2000). Unless an appeal is allowed by statute or court
rule, interlocutory orders are not independently appealable but may be
challenged only in the context of an appeal from the final judgment.'
"The order denying appellants' previously filed motion to set aside
the entries of defaults against them is likewise interlocutory, and thus,
unreviewable in the absence of final judgment. Appellants appear to have
filed a post-judgment motion seeking relief from the default judgment and
reconsideration of their motion to dismiss, but they failed to include a copy
of that motion with their docketing statement and they acknowledge that
the district court has not entered a written order resolving that motion.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947.).
Cortsol. Generator-Net'., Inc. v. Cummins Engine Co., 114 Nev. 1304, 1312,
971 P.2d 1251, 1256 (1998). Accordingly, as no final judgment has been
entered below, we lack jurisdiction and we
ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.
Parraguirre
ilLtk
Saitta
cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge
Thomas J. Tanksley, Settlement Judge
Homeowner Relief Lawyers LLC
Law Offices of Marilee A. Ryan, LLC
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA 3
(0) 1947A