F-Law
← Case library

COOPER VS. STATE OF NEV. (FAMILY)

25-33417 · 90838 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA) · July 30, 2025

Disposition:Appeal dismissed.Other Family Law

Posture Rishard'Dnae Cooper filed a pro se appeal in a matter from the Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Division. The Nevada Supreme Court reviewed the notice of appeal and the district court docket and dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Key holdings

- A notice of appeal that fails to identify the decision being challenged, where the district court docket reflects no recently entered order in the underlying matter, does not invoke the Nevada Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. See NRAP 3(c)(1)(B).

Practitioner summary

The court dismissed this pro se appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Under NRAP 3(c)(1)(B), a notice of appeal must designate the judgment or order being appealed. The court found that Cooper's notice of appeal did not identify the decision being challenged, and its review of the district court docket showed no order had been entered in the underlying matter in the last several years. Absent an appealable order properly designated, the court concluded it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal.

In plain language

Rishard'Dnae Cooper, representing himself without a lawyer, tried to appeal something to the Nevada Supreme Court. To start an appeal, a person has to file a "notice of appeal" - a document that, among other things, has to identify the lower-court decision the person is challenging. The Supreme Court looked at Cooper's notice of appeal and could not tell what decision he was trying to challenge. The court also checked the district court's docket (the official list of filings and rulings in the case) and found that no order had been entered in the underlying matter for several years. Without an identifiable order to review, the court concluded it had no jurisdiction - that is, no legal authority - to hear the appeal, and dismissed it.

Read the full opinion →

This summary is independently verified against the source opinion. It is an informational research aid, not legal advice, and no substitute for reading the decision.