Case library
Nevada family-law decisions, briefed for practice.
Practitioner summaries with key holdings, posture, disposition, and the statutes cited - up front, where you need them. Every summary links to the full opinion.
5 results for “NRAP 3A(b)(8)” in Other Family Law
JAFRI VS. WYNN (FAMILY)
Nov 12, 202525-49230 · 90649 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal dismissed.The court addressed appellate jurisdiction over a post-judgment family-court order finding contempt, imposing sanctions, and awarding attorney fees and costs incurred in contempt and enforcement proceedings. The…
LOBECK VS HARPER (FAMILY)
Oct 28, 202525-47047 · 89801 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal dismissed.The court applied its established rule that the appellant bears the burden of establishing appellate jurisdiction. See Moran v. Bonneville Square Assocs., 117 Nev. 525, 527, 25 P.3d 898, 899 (2001). Appellant invoked…
MESSING VS. CUNNING (FAMILY)
Mar 10, 202525-10949 · 89716 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal dismissed.The court analyzed substantive appealability and standing as separate questions. On appealability, the court reiterated that "[t]he substantive appealability of a district court order is not determined by the issues an…
IN RE: MARRIAGE OF FOSTER (FAMILY)
Feb 4, 202626-05475 · 91546 · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Appeal dismissed.The court dismissed sua sponte for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Citing Brown v. MHC Stagecoach, LLC, 129 Nev. 343, 345, 301 P.3d 850, 851 (2013), the court reiterated that it "may only consider appeals authorized by…
ELDER VS. ELDER (FAMILY)
Nov 20, 202525-50935 · 90368-COA · Nevada (SCOTN/COA)
Order of Affirmance and Dismissal in Part — the court "ORDER[ed] the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED and DISMISS[ed] the appeal in part."The Court of Appeals reviewed the order denying modification of child support for an abuse of discretion, citing Backman v. Gelbman, 141 Nev., Adv. Op. 8, 565 P.3d 330, 333 (Ct. App. 2025), and noting that an abuse of…
Every summary is independently verified against the source opinion; summaries are informational research aids, not legal advice, and no substitute for reading the decision. Topic groupings are derived automatically from each case’s category tag and cited statutes; a case may appear under two topics.