CHUNYK VS. DO (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The Nevada Supreme Court dismissed this pro se appeal from a post-divorce decree fee-and-costs order for failure to prosecute. After issuing a November 27, 2024 notice setting deadlines for a transcript request form (or certificate of no transcript request) and an opening or informal brief, the court issued a December 19, 2024 order under NRAP 9(a) directing compliance by January 2, 2025, and cautioning that noncompliance could result in dismissal. Appellant's January 10, 2025 transcript request form was returned unfiled as untimely and unaccompanied by a motion for extension of time. A further February 5, 2025 order set a new February 19, 2025 deadline. Appellant filed neither the transcript request form nor an opening or informal brief by the March 27, 2025 brief deadline. Treating the appeal as abandoned, the court dismissed it.

In plain language

This case involves a divorce-related dispute. After the divorce decree was entered, the trial court ordered Ms. Chunyk to pay attorney fees and costs to Mr. Do. Ms. Chunyk, representing herself without a lawyer, appealed that order to the Nevada Supreme Court. To prosecute an appeal, an appellant must take certain procedural steps, including telling the court whether transcripts of the lower-court proceedings will be requested and filing a written brief explaining why the lower court got things wrong. The Nevada Supreme Court repeatedly directed Ms. Chunyk to take these steps. On November 27, 2024, the court issued a notice setting deadlines for a transcript request form (or a certificate stating that no transcript would be requested) and for an opening brief. When she missed the transcript-form deadline, the court gave her another deadline of January 2, 2025, and warned that missing it could result in dismissal. She submitted a transcript request form on January 10, 2025, but the court returned it unfiled because it was late and was not accompanied by a motion to extend the deadline. The court then gave her a third chance, setting a February 19, 2025 deadline. She did not file the transcript form by that date, and she also did not file the opening brief that was due on March 27, 2025. Concluding that she had abandoned the appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed it. The dismissal ends this appeal without any ruling on whether the underlying attorney-fees order was right or wrong.