judyrecords
search tips
630 million+
United States Court Cases

Nevada Supreme/Appellate Court Record

WRAY VS. JOHNSON C/W 35027

Case Information: 34914
Short Caption:WRAY VS. JOHNSON C/W 35027Court:Supreme Court
Consolidated:34914*, 35027 Related Case(s): 35027
Lower Court Case(s):Clark Co. - Eighth Judicial District - A387472Classification:Civil Appeal - General - Other
Disqualifications:YoungCase Status:Remittitur Issued/Case Closed
Replacement:Panel Assigned: En Banc
To SP/Judge:10/08/1999 / Combs, E.SP Status:Completed
Oral Argument:Oral Argument Location:
Submission Date:07/26/2002How Submitted:On Briefs

+ Party Information

Docket Entries
DateTypeDescriptionPending?Document
10/04/1999Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from James Wray--check no. 1329.
10/04/1999Notice of Appeal DocumentsFiled Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal. Appeal docketed in the Supreme Court this day. 99-09478
10/04/1999OtherDisqualification of Justice Young. Law firm of Lionel Sawyer & Collins.
10/08/1999Settlement NoticeIssued Notice: Assignment to Settlement Program. Settlement Judge: E. Leslie Combs, Jr. (Briefing and preparation of transcripts and docketing statement suspended pending further order of this court.)
11/17/1999Settlement Program ReportFiled Interim Settlement Program Report. The parties were unable to agree to a settlement of this matter. 99-11402
12/03/1999Transcript RequestFiled Certificate of No Transcript Request. Certificate that No Additional Transcripts are Being Ordered. 99-12108
12/16/1999Settlement Order/ProceduralFiled Order: No Settlement/Briefing Reinstated. The parties were unable to agree to a settlement of this appeal. Appellant: 15 days to file the docketing statement; 70 days to file opening brief and appendix. Briefing shall proceed in accordance with NRAP 31(a)(1). (Docketing statement mailed to counsel for appellant). 99-12714
12/29/1999Docketing StatementFiled Docketing Statement. 99-13322
02/18/2000AppendixFiled Joint Appendix. Vols. 1 through 7. 00-02638
02/23/2000MotionFiled Motion for Excess Pages. 00-02874
02/28/2000MotionFiled Response to Motion. Opposition to Motion to Extend Opening Brief. (Charles Johnson) 00-03128
03/02/2000MotionFiled Response to Motion. Respondent David Johnson's Opposition to Appellant's Motion to File Over Length Brief. 00-03269
03/06/2000MotionFiled Motion for Permission to File Document. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission File a Reply to the Oppositions Filed Respondents to his Motion to be Granted Permission of the Supreme Court to File His Brief Which Exceeds 30 Pages. 00-03546
03/13/2000MotionFiled Motion to Extend Time. Respondent Daivd Johnson's Motion for Enlargement of Time to file Answering Brief. 00-03897
03/23/2000Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Erratum to Opening Brief of Appellant, James Wray. 00-04648
03/28/2000Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Guide (Notice) as to the Preparation of the Joint Appendix and its Relationship to the Record on Appeal. 00-04963
04/25/2000MotionFiled Motion for Excess Pages. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission to File His 37-Page Reply Brief to the Answer Filed by Respondent/Defendant, Charles Johnson. 00-06658
05/05/2000Order/ProceduralFiled Order. We deny appellant's February 23, 2000 motion to file the submitted seventy-two page opening brief. The clerk of this court shall forthwith return unfiled appellant's opening brief submitted on February 23, 2000. We deny as moot appellant's March 6, 2000, motion to file a reply to respondents' oppositions. The clerk of this court shall return, unfiled, the proposed reply received on March 6, 2000. On March 27, 2000, respondent Charles Johnson submitted an answering brief to this court. On March 28, 2000, appellant filed a "Guide as to the Preparation of the Joint Appendix and its Relationship to the Record on Appeal." From appellant's "Guide," we conclude that appellant's counsel complied with NRAP 30(a). The clerk of this court shall return, unfiled, the answering brief of respondent Charles Johnson, submitted on March 27, 2000. Appellant shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file an amended opening brief. Respondents shall have 30 days from the date of service of appellant's amended opening brief to file and serve the answering briefs (including the amended answering brief of respondent Charles Johnson). Therearter, briefing shall proceed with NRAP 31(a)(1). We deny as moot respondent David Johnson's March 13, 2000, motion for an extension of time to file an answering brief. 00-07374
05/05/2000Notice/OutgoingIssued Letter. Returned unfiled with letter to attorney Wray: original and two copies of Opening Brief of Appellant, James Wray received February 23, 2000 and the original Reply of Plaintiff/Appellant, James Wray, to the Oppositions filed by Respondents to his Motion to be Granted Permission of the Supreme Court to File His Brief Which Exceeds 30 Pages received March 6, 2000.
05/05/2000Notice/OutgoingIssued Letter. Returned unfiled with letter to attorney Edwards: original and two copies of Respondent's Answering Brief received March 27, 2000 and the original Certificate of Compliance for Respondent's Answering Brief received March 30, 2000.
05/12/2000MotionFiled Motion for Excess Pages. 00-07989
05/18/2000MotionFiled Response to Motion. Defendant/Respondent David Johnson's Opposition to Appellant's Motion to File an Over-Length Opening Brief. 00-08343
05/18/2000MotionFiled Response to Motion. Respondent's Opposition to Motion to File an Over-Length Opening Brief 00-08345
05/23/2000MotionFiled Motion for Permission to File Document. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission to File a Reply to the Oppositions Filed by Respondents to his Motion to File an Over-Length Brief. 00-08617
06/12/2000BriefReceived Answering Brief. Mailed on: 6/9/00. Respondent Charles Johnson. 00-09875
06/30/2000MotionFiled Motion. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission to File this NEW 37 Page Reply Brief to the NEW Answering Brief filed by Respondent/Defendant, Charles Johnson. 00-11212
07/05/2000Notice/IncomingFiled Notice. Errata and Notice Regarding: The NEW Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the NEW Answering Brief filed on Behalf of Respondent/Defendant, Charles Johnson. 00-11457
08/02/2000Order/ProceduralFiled Order. We grant appellant's motion of May 12, 2000, and direct the clerk of this court to file appellant's amended opening brief provisionally submitted on May 12, 2000. We caution appellant that in taking this matter under consideration we will disregard any matters in the addendum to appellant's opening brief which lack appropriate citation to the appendix or are otherwise improperly included. We deny as moot appellant's motion of May 23, 2000, to file a reply to the oppositions filed by respondents on May 18, 2000. The clerk of this court shall forthwith return, unfiled, appellant's reply to respondents' oppositions which was provisionally submitted on May 23, 2000. The clerk of this court shall forthwith file the amended answering brief provisionally submitted by respondent Charles Johnson on June 12, 2000. fn1[On April 25, 2000 appellant filed a motion for leave to file a thirty-seven page reply brief to the first answering brief of respondent Charels Johnson. We deny as moot appellant's motion of April 25, 2000, to file an overlength brief. The clerk of this court shall forthwith return, unfiled, appellant's reply brief which was provisionally submitted on April 25, 2000.] The clerk of this court shall forthwith file appellant's new reply brief provisionally submitted to this court on June 30, 2000. Furhter, the clerk shall attach to appellant's new reply brief appellant's "errata and notice" regarding the new reply brief which was filed with this court on July 5, 2000. 00-13368
08/02/2000BriefFiled Opening Brief. Opening Brief of Appellant, James Wray. 00-07990
08/02/2000BriefFiled Answering Brief. Respondent Charles Johnson. 00-09875
08/02/2000BriefFiled Reply Brief. New Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the New Answering Brief filed on Behalf of Respondent/Defendant, Charles Johnson. (08/02/00 order-attached Errata and Notice attached to the New Reply Brief). 00-11213
08/02/2000Notice/OutgoingIssued Letter. returning UNFILED the original Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the Answer Filed by Respondent/Defendant, Charles Johnson received 04/25/00 and the original Appellant's Reply to the Oppositions Filed by Respondents to Appellant's Motion to File an Over-Length Opening Brief received 06/12/00.
08/08/2000MotionFiled Motion. Defendant/Respondent David Johnson's Motion for Permission to File Answering Brief by September 1, 2000. 00-13721
09/22/2000Order/Clerk'sFiled Clerk's Order. Respondent David Johnson's motion is granted. The clerk of this court shall forthwith file the answering brief provisionally received by this court on September 5, 2000. 00-16752
09/22/2000BriefFiled Answering Brief. Respondent David Johnson's Answering Brief. 00-15551
09/28/2000MotionFiled Motion for Excess Pages. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission to file his 35 Page Reply Brief to the Answer filed by Respondent/Defendant, David Johnson. 00-17155
10/06/2000MotionFiled Response to Motion. Respondent David Johnson's Opposition to Appellant's Motion to File Over Length Reply Brief. 00-17756
10/11/2000MotionFiled Motion for Permission to File Document. Motion of Appellant, James Wray, for Permission to File a Reply to the Opposition of David Johnson to Appellant's Motion to File His 35 Page Reply Brief to David Johnson. 00-18007
12/26/2000Order/ProceduralFiled Order. The clerk of this court shall forthwith file the Reply of appellant submitted provisionally on October 11, 2000. We note that respondent David Johnson's answering brief appears to only advance arguments in support of the district court judgment. Appellant's assertion that respondent has raised "new issues" in the answering brief is without merit. To avoid any further delay in the briefing of this appeal, the clerk of this court shall forthwith file the reply brief submitted provisionally on September 28, 2000. 00-22395
12/26/2000MotionFiled Reply to Response. Reply of Appellant, James Wray, to the Opposition of David Johnson to Appellant's Motion to File His 35 Page Reply Brief. 00-18009
12/26/2000BriefFiled Reply Brief. Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the Answering Brief filed on behalf of Respondent/Defendant, David Johnson. Mailed on: 9/27/00. 00-17156
07/11/2001Order/ProceduralFiled Order. Order Consolidating Appeals and Submitting Appeals on the Briefs and Record. David Wray requests that appeal nos. 34919 and 35027 be consolidated and that he be allowed to adopt the briefs filed by James Wray in Docket No. 35027 under NRAP 28(I). David Wray also seeks permission to file a supplemental brief addressing the statue of limitations issue. Having considered the documents filed by the parties, we conclude that these appeals should be consolidated. Accordingly, we grant David Wray's motion to consolidate, and direct the clerk of this court to consolidate Docket No. 34914 and 35027 for all appellate purposes. We also grant David Wray's request to adopt the briefs filed by James Wray in Docket No. 35027. We conclude, however, that additional briefing is not warranted, and we deny David Wray's request to file a proper person supplemental brief. Further, in light of this order, we deny David Wray's alternative request for an extension of time to retain counsel. Finally, these consolidated appeals shall stand submitted for decision on the briefs and record before this court. Fn2[David Wray also submitted a motion for leave to file documents in proper person under NRAP 46(b). We grant the motion for limited purpose that David Wray may respond to our order to retain counsel. The clerk of the court shall file David Wray's proper person documents provisionally received on March 5, 2001. Nos. 34914/35027. 01-11760
07/11/2001MotionFiled Proper Person Motion. Motion to Consolidate nos. 34914/35027. 01-03988
07/11/2001Case Status Update Submitted for Decision. Nos. 34914/35027.
11/26/2001MotionFiled Motion. Motion to File Errata to the Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the Answering Brief filed on behalf of Respondent/Defendant, David Johnson. Nos. 34914/35027 01-19750
12/03/2001Order/ProceduralFiled Order Granting Motion. filed November 26, 2001, in Docket No. 34914. The clerk of this court shall file the errata received on November 19, 2001, in Docket No. 34914 only. Nos. 34914/35027. (01-20203) 01-20203
12/03/2001Notice/IncomingFiled Errata. Errata to the Reply Brief of Appellant, James Wray, to the Answering Brief filed on behalf of Respondent/Defendant, David Johnson. Errata filed in Docket No. 34914 only. Nos. 34914/35027. (01-19370) 01-19370
12/04/2001Case Status Update Resubmitted for Decision. Panel: Southern Nevada Panel. Nos. 34914/35027. SNP02M-WM/DA/ML
12/07/2001Notice/OutgoingIssued Notice of Modification of Caption. Added " Charles Johnson, Individually" to respondents.
12/12/2001Order/DispositionalFiled Order of Affirmance. "ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED." SNP02M-WM/DA/ML. Nos. 34914/35027. 01-20920
12/20/2001Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from James Wray - check no. 2229.
12/20/2001Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Mailed on: December 19, 2001. Nos. 34914/35027. 01-21510
01/02/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Amended Petition for Rehearing of Appellant, James Wray, Intended to Replace the Earlier Petition. No.s 34914/35027 02-00060
01/03/2002Other Incoming DocumentReceived Proper Person Document. Appellant, David Wray's Joinder in the Petition for Rehearing of Appellant, James Wray. Nos. 34914/35027 02-00181
04/03/2002Post-Judgment OrderFiled Order/Rehearing Denied. ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR REHEARING AND AMENDING PRIOR ORDER. Having considered this petition for rehearing we conclude that appellants have not demonstrated that rehearing is warranted. Accordingly, we deny rehearing. However, we amend our December 12, 2001 order of affirmance as follows. The last two sentences on page two, stating: The Wrays presented no evidence establishing such a relationship or duty here. Accordingly, an estate-planning attorney owes no duty to potential beneficiaries with whom no attorney-client relationship exists. Shall be replaced with the following: Even assuming without deciding, that an estate-planning attorney owes a duty to potential beneficiaries under certain circumstances, we conclude that appellants presented no evidence establishing the existence of such a duty in this case. Nos. 34914/35027. SNP02M-WM/DA/ML. 02-05965
04/03/2002Other Incoming DocumentFiled Proper Person Document. Appellant, David Wray's Joinder in the Petition for Rehearing of Appellant, James Wray. Nos. 34914/35027 02-00181
04/05/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Mailed on: 4/4/02. Nos. 34914/35027 02-06082
04/09/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Amended Petition For En Banc Reconsideration Intended to Replace the Earlier Petition. Nos. 34914/35027. 02-06313
04/09/2002MotionFiled Motion for Stay. Emergency Application For Stay of Remittitur Pending En Banc Reconsideration Intended To Be Directed To Each Justice As Well As Appropriate Staff. Nos. 34914/35027. 02-06315
04/12/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order Denying Motion. Denying Motion to Stay Issuance of the Remittitur. On April 3, 2002, this court entered an order denying appellants' petition for rehearing. On April 9, 2002, appellant in Docket No. 34914 filed a motion requesting this court to stay issuance of the remittitur pending resolution of his petition for en banc reconsideration. No good cause appearing, we deny the motion. The clerk of this court shall issue the remittitur on April 18, 2002. Nos. 34914/35027. (02-06592) 02-06592
04/16/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Emergency Motion for En Banc Reconsideration of the "Order Denying Motion to Stay Issuance of the Remittitur" which was Filed April 12, 2002. (filed via fax) Nos. 34914/35027 02-06779
04/26/2002Post-Judgment OrderFiled Order Denying En Banc Reconsideration. Denying Motion for En Banc Reconsideration of the Order Denying Motion to stay Issuance of the Remittitur. On April 16, 2002, Mr. Wray filed a motion for en banc reconsideration of the April 12, 2002, order. Having reviewed the April 9, 2002, motion for stay and the April 16, 2002, motion for en banc reconsideration, we conclude that a stay of the issuance of the remittitur is not warranted. 'We deny appellant James Wray's motion for en banc reconsideration of the April 12, 2002, order denying his motion to stay issuance of the remittitur.' The clerk of this court shall issue the remittitur in Docket Nos. 34914 and 35027. fn1[Justice Young has voluntarily recused himself from participation in this appeal.] EN BANC. Nos. 34914/35027. (02-07414) 02-07414
04/26/2002RemittiturIssued Remittitur. 02-07448
04/26/2002Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.
04/30/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order. Order Directing Answer to Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Appellants have petitioned this court for en banc reconsideration of the Order of Affirmance entered by a panel of this court on December 12, 2001. Having reviewed the petition, it appears that an answer will assist the court in resolving the issues presented. Accordingly, respondents shall have 30 days from the date of this order within which to file and serve an answer to the petition. In light of this order, we recall the remittitur issued on April 26, 2002. Nos. 34914/35027. 02-07638
05/10/2002RemittiturFiled Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on April 29, 2002. 02-07448
05/29/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Answer to Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Respondent, Charles Johnson's Answer to Appellant's Amended Petition for En Banc Reconsideration Intended to Replace Earlier Petition. Nos. 34914/35027 02-09361
05/30/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Answer to Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Respondent David Johnson's Answer to Petition for En Banc Reconsideration. Nos. 34914/35027. 02-09422
07/26/2002Post-Judgment OrderFiled Order Granting En Banc Reconsideration. We grant the petition for en banc reconsideration and submit this matter for decision on reconsideration without further briefing or oral argument. NRAP 40A(f). Nos. 34914/35027. (02-12866) 02-12866
07/26/2002Case Status Update Submitted for Decision. Submitted on en banc reconsideration.
12/17/2002Order/DispositionalFiled Order of Affirmance. On July 26, 2002, this court granted appellants' petition for en banc reconsideration. This decision is issued in lieu of our order of affirmance issued by the Southern Panel on December 12, 2001. "ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED." fn7[The Honorable Cliff Young, Chief Justice, voluntarily recused himself from participation in the decision of this matter.] En Banc-Shearing, Agosti, Leavitt, and Becker, JJ. Maupin, J., with whom Rose, J. agrees, concurring in part and dissenting in part. Nos. 34914/ 35027. 02-21574
12/31/2002Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $100 from James Wray--check no. 2578.
12/31/2002Post-Judgment PetitionFiled Petition for Rehearing. Petition for Rehearing as a Result of the En Banc Order of Affirmance filed December 17, 2002. Nos. 34914/35027. 02-22229
02/20/2003Post-Judgment OrderFiled Order/Rehearing Denied. "Rehearing denied." NRAP 40(c). fn1[The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Justice, did not participate in the decision of this matter.] EN BANC. Nos. 34914/35027. 03-02860
02/25/2003MotionFiled Motion. Motion that the Nevada Supreme Court Correct its Fraudulent Orders of December 17, 2002, and February 20, 2003, & that the Nevada Supreme Court Find its Orders (as Now Incorrectly Written) are in Violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution. Nos. 34914/35027 03-03136
03/03/2003MotionFiled Response to Motion. Respondent David Johnson's Opposition to Motion that the Nevada Supreme Court Corrects its Fraudulent Orders of December 17, 2002 and February 20, 2003, & that the Nevada Supreme Court finds its Orders are in Violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Construction. Nos. 34919/35027. 03-03374
03/05/2003MotionFiled Response to Motion. Respondent, Charles Johnson's Opposition to Appellant's "Motion that the Nevada Supreme Court Corrects its Fraudulent Orders of December 17, 2002 and February 20, 2003, & that the Nevada Supreme Court finds its Orders are in Violation of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution." Nos. 34919/35027. 03-03655
03/10/2003MotionFiled Motion. Motion for Stay of Remittitur pending Application to the Supreme Court of the United States for a Writ of Certiorari & Motion for Permission to Fie a Reply to the Oppositions filed by Respondents to Appellant's Motion that the Nevada Supreme Court Correct Its Fraudulent Orders. Nos. 34914/35027 03-03982
03/21/2003Order/ProceduralFiled Order Denying Motion. On December 12, 2001, a three-judge panel of this court entered an Order of Affirmance in these consolidated appeals. The petition for rehearing was denied on April 3, 2002. En banc reconsideration was granted on July 26, 2002, and on December 17, 2002, the en banc court entered a new Order of Affirmance in these consolidated appeals. En banc rehearing was denied on February 20, 2003. On February 25, 2003, appellant James Wray filed a motion what he claims are 6 falsehoods that are contained in this court's December 17, 2002, and February 20, 2003, orders. Respondents oppose the motion. Additionally, respondent Charles Johnson requests this court to award him attorney fees and costs for having to answer 'frivolous Motions, Petitions, Petitions for Rehearing, and Petitions for Reconsideration.' On March 10, 2003, Mr. Wray filed a motion requesting leave to file a reply to respondents' oppositions. No good cause appearing, we deny the motion to file a reply. Mr. Wray appears to be asking this court to again rehear these consolidated appeals. Because this court has already considered and denied appellants' petition for en banc rehearing, we deny Mr. Wray's motion. Further, we conclude that the imposition of sanctions is not warranted at this time and we deny Mr. Johnson's request. On March 10, 2003, Mr. Wray filed a motion requesting this court to stay issuance of the remittitur pending his application to the Supreme Court of the United States for a writ of certiorari. No good cause appearing, we deny the motion. Because appellants have exhausted all available remedies in these consolidated appeals, the parties shall be prohibited from filing any additional documents in these consolidated appeals. The clerk of this court shall return, unfiled, any future documents that may be submitted in these consolidated appeals. fn1[The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Justice, did not participate in the decision of this matter.] Nos. 34914/35027. (03-04824) 03-04824
03/21/2003RemittiturIssued Remittitur. 03-04843
03/21/2003Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.
04/03/2003RemittiturFiled Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on March 24, 2003. 03-04843
04/23/2003Notice/IncomingFiled Notice from U.S. Supreme Court\Certiorari Denied. A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed April 10, 2003 and placed on the docket as Case No. 02-1496. (No. 34914 only) 03-06900
06/23/2003Notice/IncomingFiled Notice from U.S. Supreme Court\Certiorari Granted. The petition for a writ of ceritorari is denied. (34914 only). 03-10492