BACA VS. BACA (CHILD CUSTODY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

This is an unpublished order dismissing a pro se appeal from a district court order denying modification of child custody for failure to prosecute. The court recited that it had directed appellant on February 3, 2025, to file a transcript request form or certificate of no transcript request within 14 days, a docketing statement within 21 days, and a fast track opening brief within 60 days. After appellant failed to file the transcript request form and docketing statement, the court issued a March 21, 2025 order directing compliance within 14 days and cautioning that noncompliance could result in dismissal, citing NRAP 9(a)(10) and NRAP 14(c). Appellant filed nothing further, missed the April 4, 2025 fast track opening brief deadline, and did not communicate with the court. On that record, the court found apparent abandonment and dismissed.

In plain language

Jessie Elias Baca asked a Clark County family court to change the custody arrangement for his minor child. The family court declined to modify custody, and Mr. Baca - representing himself, without a lawyer - appealed that decision to the Nevada Supreme Court. When someone files an appeal, the Supreme Court requires the appellant to take certain procedural steps: telling the court whether transcripts of the lower-court hearings will be ordered, filing a "docketing statement" (a basic information form about the case), and filing an opening brief explaining why the lower court got it wrong. On February 3, 2025, the court sent Mr. Baca a notice setting deadlines for each of these items. Mr. Baca missed the deadlines. On March 21, 2025, the court issued a follow-up order giving him another 14 days to file the missing documents and warning him that the appeal could be dismissed if he did not comply. He did not file the documents. He also did not file the opening brief by its April 4, 2025 deadline, and he did not contact the court at all. Concluding that Mr. Baca had abandoned the appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed it. The dismissal ends this appeal; the family court's order refusing to modify custody remains in place.