| Docket Entries |
| Date | Type | Description | Pending? | Document |
| 04/29/2003 | Other | Disqualification of Justice Leavitt. Law firm of Hale Lane Peek Dennison Howard & Anderson. | | |
| 04/29/2003 | Filing Fee | Filing Fee due. | | |
| 04/29/2003 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal. Appeal docketed in the Supreme Court this day. (Docketing statement mailed to counsel for appellant.) | | 03-07241
|
| 04/29/2003 | Notice/Outgoing | Issued Notice to Pay Supreme Court Filing Fee. Due Date: 10 days | | |
| 04/29/2003 | Transcript Request | Filed Certificate of No Transcript Request. | | 03-07266
|
| 05/02/2003 | Notice/Outgoing | Issued Notice to Transmit Required Document. district court minutes. Due Date: 10 days | | |
| 05/05/2003 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from Lionel Sawyer & Collins--check no. 013983. | | |
| 05/19/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Motion to Enlarge Time to File Amended Docketing Statement. | | 03-08464
|
| 06/09/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Respondent Harris Arizona Rebar's Limited Opposition to Enlarge Time to File Amended Docketing Statement. | | 03-09595
|
| 06/30/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. On May 19, 2003, appellants in these related appeals filed a "Motion to Enlarge Time to File Amended Docketing Statement," in both appeals. Appellants request leave to file an amended docketing statement in Docket No. 41163 within 30 days after the district court resolves the pending motions, and to extend the time to file the initial docketing statement in Docket No. 41332 to 30 days after the district court resolves the motions. No good cause appearing, we deny the motions. In the interest of judicial economy, however, appellants may file the docketing statement for Docket No. 41332 within 30 days from the date of this order. We note that this court's appellate rules do not prohibit appellants from supplementing a previously filed docketing statement, if appropriate, after the entry of any relevant district court order. Additionally, we note that it may also be appropriate for appellants to file an amended notice of appeal or new notice of appeal depending on the substance of the district court order. Appellants may also determine that it's appropriate to file a motion to voluntarily dismiss either of these appeals if they are made moot by subsequent proceedings below. We remind the parties that this court will not address jurisdictional issues while these appeals are in this court's settlement program. If the parties believe such issues may need to be addressed, they should request the settlement judge to file a settlement conference report recommending that the relevant appeal be removed from the settlement program. Nos. 41163/41332-cases are not consolidated. | | 03-10905
|
| 07/23/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion to Dismiss Appeal. Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction. | | 03-12452
|
| 01/12/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Denying Motion. to Dismiss Appeal. The parties have jointly filed a "Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction." On June 30, 2003, this court entered an order directing appellants to file a docketing statement by July 30, 2003. As of the date of this order, appellants have not filed a docketing statement. We decline to conduct a jurisdictional review of this appeal until appellants file a docketing statement. Because of this, we deny the parties' motion to dismiss at this time. This denial is without prejudice to appellants' right to file an unconditional motion or stipulation to dismiss this appeal pursuant to NRAP 42(b). If appellants do not wish to voluntarily dismiss this appeal unconditionally, they shall file and serve the docketing statement within 20 days from the date of this order, and file and serve the opening brief and appendix within 60 days from the date of this order. Thereafter, briefing shall proceed in accordance with NRAP 31(a)(1). | | 04-00641
|
| 02/03/2004 | Docketing Statement | Filed Docketing Statement. | | 04-02141
|
| 02/23/2004 | Motion | Filed Motion to Dismiss Appeal. Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Request to Extend Briefing Schedule. | | 04-03450
|
| 03/03/2004 | Motion | Filed Motion. Respondent's Request for Extension of Time and Notice of Non-Opposition in Part to Appellants' Motion Re Briefing. | | 04-04054
|
| 03/09/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. Suspending Briefing Schedule and Granting Request for Extension of Time. On February 23, 2004, appellants filed in this court a motion to dismiss their appeal for lack of jurisdiction and to suspend the current briefing schedule. On March 3, 2004, respondent Harris/Arizona Rebar, Inc., requested 30 additional days to respond to appellants' motion to dismiss. Harris also concurred in appellants' request to suspend the briefing schedule. We grant appellants' request, and we suspend the briefing schedule in this appeal until further order of this court. We grant Harris' request for an extension of time. Harris shall have 30 days from this order's date to file an opposition to dismissal. | | 04-04487
|
| 07/06/2004 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Amended/Supplemental. | | 04-12210
|
| 07/20/2004 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Amended/Supplemental. | | 04-13136
|
| 07/26/2004 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. | | 04-13577
|
| 08/25/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. Regarding Jurisdictional Motions. These are appeals from district court orders and judgments entered after preferential lien hearings. In Docket No. 41163, appellants have filed a motion for a jurisdictional determination. In Docket Nos. 41332 and 42265, appellants have filed, respectively, a motion to dismiss and a motion for confirmation that jurisdiction is absent. The respondent subcontractors have opposed the motions. fn1[In Docket No. 41163, we grant respondent Herrick Corporation's May 14, 2004 and June 18, 2004 motions for extensions of time in which to file an opposition to appellants' motion for a jurisdictional determination. The clerk of this court shall file Herrick's response and exhibits, provisionally received on July 1, 2004.] On June 29, 2004, after appellants' motions were filed in this court, the district court deconsolidated the In re Venetian Lien Litigation cases. With the dismissals of the subcontractors' non-lien claims, it appears that this court has jurisdiction to review the appeals in Docket Nos. 41163 and 42265, notwithstanding appellants' concerns about severance and the lack of NRCP 54(b) certification. We grant appellants' motion for a jurisdictional determination in Docket No. 41163, and we conclude that this court has jurisdiction to review the appeal. We construe the motion for a jurisdictional confirmation in Docket No. 42265 as seeking a jurisdictional determination, and we grant the motion on the basis that this court has jurisdiction. Therefore, we shall allow the appeals in Docket Nos. 41163 and 42265 to proceed. In Docket No. 41163, we grant appellants' unopposed May 10, 2004 motion regarding the briefing schedule. Appellants shall have 45 days from the date of this order within which to file the opening brief and appendix. fn7[We deny appellants' alternative request, advanced in their motion for a jurisdictional determination, to hold this appeal in abeyance until all of the subcontractors' cases are completed in the district court and appealed.] Thereafter, briefing shall proceed under NRAP 31(a)(1). In Docket No. 42265, the briefing schedule and NRAP 9(a) requirements shall remain suspended pending further order of this court. As this appeal was removed from the court's Settlement Conference Program on March 16, 2004, for resolution of appellants' motion for jurisdictional confirmation, we now direct the clerk of this court to issue a notice reassigning this appeal to the Settlement Conference Program. This court may still lack jurisdiction over the appeal in Docket No. 41332. We defer ruling on the motion to dismiss pending appellants' response to this potential jurisdictional defect. Appellants shall have 30 days from the date of this order within which to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, because of the possibly pending counterclaim. The briefing schedule in this appeal remains suspended pending further order of this court. Respondents may file any reply within ten days from the date that appellants' response is served. Nos. 41163/ 41332/ 42265 – cases are not consolidated. | | 04-15361
|
| 09/27/2004 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. | | 04-17793
|
| 09/27/2004 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Amended/Supplemental. | | 04-17794
|
| 10/12/2004 | Motion | Filed Reply to Response. Harris/Arizona Rebar's Reply to Order to Show Cause. | | 04-18894
|
| 01/10/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Denying Motion. and Allowing Appeal to Proceed. On February 23, 2004, appellants moved to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction arguing that claims remained pending below in numerous consolidated cases and that the district court had withdrawn certification under former NRCP 54(b). Respondent Harris/Arizona Rebar, Inc., filed an opposition. On August 25, 2004, we deferred ruling on the motion and ordered appellants to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed because respondent Dick Corporation's indemnification counterclaim against Harris/Arizona was apparently still pending below. In response to our show cause order, appellants and Harris/Arizona contend that this court has jurisdiction, notwithstanding the pendency of Dick Corporation's counterclaim. The parties explain that on August 6, 2004, the district court recertified the June 17, 2002 judgment as final under former NRCP 54(b). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in recertifying the June 2002 judgment as final under former NRCP 54(b). As this court has jurisdiction to consider this appeal, we deny appellants' motion to dismiss and we reinstate the briefing schedule. Appellants shall have forty-five days from the date of this order within which to file and serve the opening brief and appendix. Thereafter, briefing shall proceed under NRAP 31(a)(1). | | 05-00442
|
| 02/25/2005 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Brief due: March 28, 2005. | | 05-03773
|
| 03/31/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. | | 05-06345
|
| 04/07/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. filed March 31, 2005. Appellants shall have until April 27, 2005, to file and serve their opening brief and appendix. No further extensions of time shall be permitted absent demonstration of extreme and unforeseeable circumstances. Counsel's caseload will not be deemed such a circumstance. | | 05-06824
|
| 05/02/2005 | Brief | Filed Opening Brief. | | 05-08553
|
| 05/02/2005 | Appendix | Filed Joint Appendix. Vols. 1 through 18. | | |
| 05/31/2005 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Respondent Harris Arizona Rebar, Inc. Brief due: June 27, 2005. | | 05-10626
|
| 06/20/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. (second request-30 days requested) | | 05-12119
|
| 07/13/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. and Directing the Filing of Answering Briefs. Harris/Arizona Rebar, Inc. shall have until July 27, 2005, to file and serve its answering brief. To date, Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc. and Dick Corporation have failed to file their answering briefs. Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc. and Dick Corporation shall, within 10 days from the date of this order, file and serve their answering briefs. Appellants may file a reply brief, if deemed necessary, within 30 days from service of the final answering brief. | | 05-13934
|
| 07/28/2005 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. (First Request-Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc.) Brief due: August 5, 2005. | | 05-15029
|
| 08/01/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Answering Brief. | | 05-15216
|
| 08/11/2005 | Brief | Filed Answering Brief. Respondent Lehrer McGovern Bovis, Inc.'s Answering Brief. | | 05-15864
|
| 08/11/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion. 10/18/05 Order: Detached and filed Exhibit A and B from the Motion to Supplement Record filed August 11, 2005.jcr | | 05-15867
|
| 08/15/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Joint Motion for Extension of Time to file Answering Brief. | | 05-16119
|
| 09/06/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion and Order/Excess Pages. Granted: 40 pages. | | 05-17602
|
| 09/23/2005 | Motion | Filed Stipulation. | | 05-18958
|
| 10/18/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. We grant the motion filed August 11, 2005. The clerk shall detach and file the two documents attached to LMB's motion labeled as Exhibit 'A' and Exhibit 'B'. This court may later disregard any arguments or documents that are not properly before this court. We grant the motions filed August 1, 2005 and August 15, 2005. The clerk shall file the answering brief and appendix received on September 6, 2005. Answering brief or a joinder in the answering briefs filed by Harris and/or LMB due from Dick Corporation: 10 days. Failure to timely comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. Appellants' reply brief due: November 2, 2005. | | 05-20608
|
| 10/18/2005 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Jury Verdict Form filed in Open Court 12-24-03.
10/18/05 Order: Detached and filed Exhibit A and B from the Motion to Supplement Record filed August 11, 2005.jcr | | 05-20612
|
| 10/18/2005 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Order Regardig Duty to Defend filed in the district court on July 19, 2004.
10/18/05 Order: Detached and filed Exhibit A and B from the Motion to Supplement Record filed August 11, 2005.jcr | | 05-20613
|
| 10/18/2005 | Brief | Filed Answering Brief. (Harris Arizona Rebar). | | 05-17603
|
| 10/18/2005 | Appendix | Filed Appendix. Volumes 19 through 23. | | |
| 10/27/2005 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Joint Motion to Extend Time to File Appellant's Reply Brief (Second Request). | | 05-21345
|
| 10/31/2005 | Other | Filed Statement in Response. | | 05-21407
|
| 11/10/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. We conclude that Dick Corporation's "Statement in Response" complies with the directives in our October 18, 2005, order because it joins in Harris' answering brief. Dick Corporation shall remain as a respondent to this appeal. Reply brief due: November 16, 2005. No further extensions of time shall be permitted absent demonstration of extreme and unforeseeable circumstances. | | 05-22191
|
| 11/15/2005 | Other | Disqualification of Justice Parraguirre. Law firm of Harrison Kemp & Jones, LLP. | | |
| 11/18/2005 | Brief | Filed Reply Brief. | | 05-22793
|
| 11/18/2005 | Appendix | Filed Appendix to Reply Brief. Appellant's Supplemental Appendix in Support of Reply Brief, Volume 24. | | |
| 02/27/2006 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice of Appearance. Venetian Casino Resort, LLC's Notice of Appearance. Representing appellant: D. Lee Roberts, Jr. of Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial, LLC. | | 06-04269
|
| 06/14/2006 | Motion | Filed Stipulation/Dismiss Appeal. | | 06-12450
|
| 07/05/2006 | Order/Dispositional | Filed Stipulated Dismissal. Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, and cause appearing, " . . . this appeal is dismissed." The parties shall bear their own costs and attorney fees. NRAP 42(b). EN BANC/CLK | | 06-13805
|
| 07/05/2006 | Case Status Update | Case Closed. No remittitur issued. | | |