LAITY VS. LAITY (CHILD CUSTODY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The court dismissed the appeal under NRAP 3(a)(2) for failure to comply with filing-fee requirements. The opinion notes that the appeal was docketed on October 9, 2025, without payment of the requisite filing fee as required by NRAP 3(e). Although appellant filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis with the Supreme Court the same day, NRAP 24(a) requires that such a motion be filed in the district court in the first instance. The Supreme Court denied that motion without prejudice on October 14, 2025, and directed appellant either to file the in forma pauperis motion in the district court (and file a stamped copy in the Supreme Court) or to pay the filing fee within 30 days. Appellant did not do either, and the appeal was dismissed.

In plain language

This is a procedural dismissal, not a ruling on the merits of the underlying child custody dispute. When someone files an appeal with the Nevada Supreme Court, they generally must pay a filing fee. If they cannot afford the fee, they can ask to proceed "in forma pauperis" - a legal term meaning the court allows the case to go forward without payment because of financial hardship. Here, the appellant filed his appeal but did not pay the filing fee. The court told him he had 14 days to either pay or properly request a fee waiver. He filed a fee-waiver motion, but he filed it in the wrong court - it must first be filed in the district court (the lower court), not the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied that motion without prejudice (meaning he could try again the right way) and gave him 30 more days to either file the motion in district court and provide proof, or pay the fee. He did neither. Because of that, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.