WALKER VS. WALKER (CHILD CUSTODY)

Key holdings

Practitioner summary

The court dismissed a pro se postjudgment family law appeal as abandoned based on the appellant's failure to file a docketing statement and fast track statement after notice and a second compliance order. The October 13, 2023 filing-deadlines notice set a November 3, 2023 deadline for the docketing statement and a November 22, 2023 deadline for the fast track statement. After noncompliance, the court issued a November 28, 2023 order directing filing by December 12, 2023, and cautioning that noncompliance could result in dismissal. See NRAP 3E(i); NRAP 14(c). The appellant did not file the documents or communicate with the court, and the court dismissed the appeal as abandoned.

In plain language

This is a short procedural order, not a ruling on the merits of any family law dispute. Cody C. Walker filed an appeal from a postjudgment order in a child-custody-related family law case. He represented himself, without a lawyer. When someone files an appeal in the Nevada Supreme Court, they must file certain paperwork on a schedule - including a "docketing statement" (a form identifying the case and the issues) and a "fast track statement" (a short brief used in family-law appeals). The court told Mr. Walker on October 13, 2023, that his docketing statement was due November 3, 2023, and his fast track statement was due November 22, 2023. He missed both deadlines. On November 28, 2023, the court issued a second order giving Mr. Walker until December 12, 2023, to file the missing documents and warning him that if he did not, his appeal could be dismissed as abandoned. He still did not file the documents and did not otherwise contact the court. Because of that, the Supreme Court concluded that he had abandoned the appeal and dismissed it. The order does not address the underlying child-custody dispute or the merits of the postjudgment order Mr. Walker was trying to challenge.