IN RE: PETITION BY RAMONDA (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The Court conducted a sua sponte jurisdictional review of the notice of appeal. Citing Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013), the Court reiterated that it "may only consider appeals authorized by statute or court rule." Because no statute or court rule authorizes an appeal from an order denying a motion to disqualify a district judge, the challenged order is not substantively appealable, and the Court lacks appellate jurisdiction. The Court accordingly dismissed the appeal and denied the parties' pending procedural motions as moot, including the appellant's motions to extend deadlines for the docketing statement, transcript request form, and opening brief, and to waive transcript costs; and the respondent's motions for stay, to dismiss, and emergency motion to enforce the custody order and pickup warrant. The clerk was directed to strike the transcript request form filed November 6, 2025. The Court noted respondent may refile the stay and enforcement motions in the district court if appropriate.

In plain language

A party in a Clark County family court case asked the trial judge to step aside (a process called "disqualification"). The trial court denied that request, and the party then tried to appeal the denial to the Nevada Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal without reaching the merits. The reason is jurisdictional: in Nevada, the Supreme Court can only hear appeals that some statute or court rule specifically authorizes. No statute or rule allows a direct appeal from an order refusing to disqualify a judge. Because the order is not on the list of appealable orders, the Supreme Court has no power to consider it. The Court also cleaned up the docket by denying as moot the appellant's pending motions to extend filing deadlines and to waive transcript-preparation costs, and the respondent's motions for a stay, to dismiss, and to enforce a custody order and pickup warrant. The Court noted that the respondent may refile the motion for stay and the motion to enforce the custody order in the district court, if appropriate.