LACOST VS. LACOST (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The court dismissed the appeal under its authority to manage its docket where an appellant fails to comply with NRAP 9 (transcript requirements) and NRAP 14(b) (docketing statement requirements) despite multiple notices and warnings. The order recites a sequence of (1) a September 2, 2025 notice setting initial filing deadlines; (2) a deficient September 9, 2025 transcript request submission; (3) an order requiring a corrected transcript request by September 25, 2025; (4) an October 2, 2025 order extending the deadline to October 9, 2025, and warning of dismissal; and (5) continued noncompliance. The court concluded the appellant had abandoned the appeal and dismissed it on that basis.

In plain language

This is a procedural dismissal, not a ruling on the merits of the underlying divorce case. When someone appeals to the Nevada Supreme Court, they must complete certain initial paperwork - including a transcript request form (which tells the court what hearing transcripts to gather) and a docketing statement (a form summarizing the case for the court). According to the order, the Supreme Court issued a notice on September 2, 2025, telling the appellant to file these documents within set deadlines. The appellant tried to file a transcript request form on September 9, 2025, but the court found it deficient and gave her until September 25, 2025, to file a corrected version. When she did not, the court issued another order on October 2, 2025, extending the deadline to October 9, 2025, and warning that the appeal could be dismissed if she did not comply. She did not file the documents, so the court dismissed the appeal, treating it as abandoned.