LACOST VS. LACOST (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The court applied the settled rule that its appellate jurisdiction is limited to appeals authorized by statute or court rule. See Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013) ("[This court] may only consider appeals authorized by statute or court rule."). Identifying no statute or court rule authorizing an appeal from an order denying a motion to disqualify a district judge, the court found a jurisdictional defect on the face of the notice of appeal and dismissed the appeal without reaching the merits. The pending procedural motions - an emergency motion for stay, a renewed emergency motion for stay, a motion to waive transcript fees, and a motion to compel rulings on pending emergency motions - were denied as moot in light of the dismissal.

In plain language

Chandra Lynn LaCost asked the trial judge handling her family-court case to step aside (a process called "disqualification"). The trial court denied that request. She then tried to appeal that denial directly to the Nevada Supreme Court. The Supreme Court did not reach the merits of whether the judge should have stepped aside. Instead, it dismissed the appeal on a threshold jurisdictional ground: under Nevada law, the Supreme Court can only hear appeals that a statute or court rule specifically allows, and no statute or rule allows a direct appeal from an order refusing to disqualify a judge. Because the order she tried to appeal is not on the list of appealable orders, the court had no power to consider the appeal and dismissed it. The court also denied as moot her pending emergency motion for stay, renewed emergency motion for stay, motion to waive transcript fees, and motion to compel rulings on pending emergency motions.