F-Law
← Case library

LLONTOP VS. LLONTOP (FAMILY)

91484 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA) · November 13, 2025

Disposition:Appeal dismissed.Other Family Law

Posture Pablo Llontop appealed in a family-law matter (Case No. 91484), with Maria Llontop as respondent. Before the appeal was resolved on the merits, the parties filed a stipulation, and the Supreme Court of Nevada dismissed the appeal pursuant to that stipulation.

Editorial review flagged 4 item(s) at material severity. Verify against the source PDF before relying.

Key holdings

- Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the appeal is dismissed under NRAP 27(c)(3). - Each party shall bear their own attorney fees and costs.

Practitioner summary

This is a clerk's order dismissing an appeal by stipulation of the parties under NRAP 27(c)(3). The order contains no substantive analysis, standard of review, or doctrinal discussion, because the dismissal rests solely on the parties' agreement rather than a merits determination. The court dismissed the appeal and directed that each party bear their own attorney fees and costs. The matter arose from proceedings before the Honorable Vincent Ochoa, District Judge, but the order does not describe the underlying district-court ruling or the issues presented on appeal.

In plain language

This is a very short order in a family-law case. Two people, Pablo Llontop and Maria Llontop, were involved in an appeal to the Nevada Supreme Court. Pablo was the appellant (the person who brought the appeal), and Maria was the respondent (the person responding to it). Rather than have the court decide the appeal, the two sides reached an agreement - called a stipulation - to end the appeal. Based on that agreement, the court dismissed the appeal. The court also ordered that each side would pay its own attorney fees and costs. The order does not describe the underlying dispute, the lower-court ruling that was being appealed, or any legal issues. It simply records that the appeal ended by agreement of the parties.

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.