POPELKOVA VS. MILLER (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

This is a clerk's order dismissing an appeal and cross-appeal upon the stipulation of the parties. The court invoked NRAP 42 as the basis for dismissal. The order recites that dismissal follows "the stipulation of the parties, and cause appearing." The court directed that "[t]he parties shall bear their own costs and attorney fees." The order announces no substantive rule, applies no standard of review, and engages in no doctrinal analysis, as it disposes of the matter on the parties' stipulated request rather than on the merits. The matter originated in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Family Division, before the Hon. Stephanie Charter, with Stephen E. Haberfeld serving as Settlement Judge.

In plain language

This is a short procedural order, not a decision on the merits of any dispute. Two parties, Renata Popelkova and Howard Miller, had a case in the family court. One side (Popelkova) appealed and the other side (Miller) filed a cross-appeal - meaning both parties asked the Nevada Supreme Court to review something from the lower court. Before the court decided any of the underlying issues, the two sides reached an agreement to end the appeals. This kind of agreement is called a stipulation - a formal, mutual agreement between the parties that is submitted to the court. Based on that stipulation, the court dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal. The order also states that each side will pay its own costs and attorney fees. Because this is a dismissal by agreement, the opinion does not explain the facts of the underlying family-law dispute, does not resolve any legal question, and does not address who "won." It simply closes out the appellate proceedings.