VARNER VS. DEP'T OF FAMILY SERV. (FAMILY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

This is an order of dismissal for failure to prosecute. The Supreme Court tracked appellant's noncompliance with NRAP 9 (transcript request) and NRAP 14(b) (docketing statement), as well as the briefing schedule established by the court's January 17, 2025 notice. After successive orders on March 5, 2025, and April 16, 2025 - each warning that noncompliance could result in dismissal - appellant failed to file a corrected transcript request form or certificate of no transcript request, failed to file a corrected docketing statement, and failed to file an opening brief or informal brief by the May 19, 2025 deadline. The court treated this pattern as abandonment and dismissed the appeal without reaching the merits of the underlying district court order denying the writ petition for lack of service.

In plain language

Khari Varner asked the district court for a writ of mandamus - a court order requiring a government official or lower court to perform a duty it is legally required to perform. The district court denied that petition because Varner had not properly served it on the other side. Varner then appealed that denial to the Nevada Supreme Court, representing himself. Once the appeal was filed, the Supreme Court issued a notice on January 17, 2025, telling Varner what he had to do next. He needed to file a transcript request form (or a certificate stating no transcript was needed), a docketing statement (a form summarizing the appeal), and an opening brief (the document that explains why the lower court got it wrong). Each had its own deadline. Varner missed the first deadlines. The court issued a follow-up order on March 5, 2025, giving him a new deadline of March 12, 2025, and warning that failure to comply could result in dismissal. Varner attempted to file the documents on March 12, but the clerk struck them as deficient. The court then gave him until March 27, 2025, to file corrected versions. He did not. On April 16, 2025, the court issued yet another order, setting an April 23, 2025 deadline and again warning of possible dismissal. He still did not file the corrected documents. He also missed the May 19, 2025 deadline for the opening brief. Concluding that Varner had abandoned the appeal, the Supreme Court dismissed it. The court did not reach the merits of whether the district court was correct to deny the mandamus petition.