HATCH VS. HATCH (CHILD CUSTODY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

Following a remand under NRAP 12A(b) to allow the district court to set aside the decree of divorce and reopen discovery, the appellant failed to comply with two successive orders from the Nevada Supreme Court directing him to file a written status report on the post-remand district court proceedings. The court's August 8, 2022, order expressly cautioned that noncompliance could result in sanctions including dismissal. Based on the appellant's continued silence, the court found the appeal abandoned and dismissed it.

In plain language

This was an appeal from a divorce decree. Early in the appeal, the wife (Kayce Hatch) asked the Supreme Court to send the case back to the trial court so the trial court could undo the decree and reopen the evidence-gathering process. The husband (Luke Hatch) did not oppose that request, and the Supreme Court agreed to send the case back on May 4, 2022. Under the rule used to send the case back, the parties were supposed to tell the Supreme Court when the trial court finished its work. After the remand, neither side updated the Supreme Court. On June 8, 2022, the court ordered the husband to provide a written status update by July 8, 2022. He did not. On August 8, 2022, the court issued a second order requiring a status update by August 15, 2022, and warned that failing to respond could lead to sanctions, including dismissal. The husband still did not respond. Concluding that he had abandoned the appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed it.