F-Law
← Case library

JENSEN VS. PLEDGER (CHILD CUSTODY)

24-44137 · 89533 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA) · November 20, 2024

Disposition:Appeal dismissed.Custody & Relocation

Posture Ryan Michael Jensen filed an appeal in a child custody matter involving Devyn Nicol Pledger. The appeal was docketed on October 28, 2024, without payment of the required filing fee. The Nevada Supreme Court issued a notice directing Jensen to pay the fee or demonstrate compliance with NRAP 24 within 14 days, warning that noncompliance would result in dismissal.

Editorial review flagged 8 item(s) at material severity. Verify against the source PDF before relying.

Key holdings

- Failure to pay the filing fee required by NRAP 3(e), or to comply with NRAP 24, after notice from the court warrants dismissal of the appeal under NRAP 3(a)(2).

Practitioner summary

The Nevada Supreme Court dismissed this appeal for failure to pay the filing fee required by NRAP 3(e) and failure to respond to the court's notice directing payment or compliance with NRAP 24 within 14 days. The court invoked NRAP 3(a)(2) as authority for dismissal. The order does not reach any substantive issues in the underlying child custody matter from the Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Division (Hon. Charles J. Hoskin).

In plain language

This is a brief administrative dismissal, not a ruling on the merits of any custody dispute. When someone files an appeal with the Nevada Supreme Court, they generally must pay a filing fee or, if they cannot afford it, follow a procedure (under a rule called NRAP 24) to ask the court to waive the fee because of financial hardship. In this case, the appellant, Ryan Michael Jensen, filed his appeal but did not pay the filing fee. The court sent him a notice the same day his appeal was docketed, telling him he had 14 days either to pay the fee or to follow the waiver procedure, and warning him that if he did neither, the appeal would be thrown out. According to the court, Jensen did not pay the fee and did not respond to the notice. The court therefore dismissed the appeal. Because the dismissal is procedural, the court did not consider any of the underlying child custody issues between Jensen and Devyn Nicol Pledger.

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.