| Docket Entries |
| Date | Type | Description | Pending? | Document |
| 06/19/2001 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from Beckley Singleton--check no. 085929. | | |
| 06/19/2001 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Settlement. Notice re: settlement conference program/suspension of rules mailed to all counsel. (Docketing statement mailed to counsel for appellant.) | | 01-10239
|
| 06/19/2001 | Filing Fee | Received Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from Kummer Kaempfer Bonner & Renshaw--check no. 34544. | | |
| 06/19/2001 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Cross-Appeal. (Docketing statement mailed to counsel for cross-appellant.) | | 01-10240
|
| 06/22/2001 | Settlement Notice | Issued Notice: Assignment to Settlement Program. Settlement Judge: David K. Robinson. (Briefing and preparation of transcripts suspended pending further order of this court.) | | |
| 07/09/2001 | Docketing Statement | Filed Docketing Statement. Appellants/Cross-Respondents. | | 01-11511
|
| 07/09/2001 | Docketing Statement | Filed Docketing Statement. Respondent/Cross-Appellant. | | 01-11515
|
| 07/16/2001 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Notice. Notice of Filing Original Signature. (For docketing statement.) | | 01-12052
|
| 07/19/2001 | Notice/Outgoing | Letter. David K. Robinson. | | |
| 08/30/2001 | Settlement Program Report | Filed Interim Settlement Program Report. No counsel appeared for appellants. Sanctions recommended for both appellants' attorneys. Nos. 37752/38045. | | 01-14702
|
| 09/04/2001 | Motion | Filed Motion to Dismiss Appeal. Motion to Dismiss Class Plaintiffs' Appeal and for Monetary Sanctions for Willful Refusal to Participate in NRAP Rule 16 Settlement Conference. | | 01-14840
|
| 09/07/2001 | Transcript Request | Filed Request for Transcript of Proceedings. Transcripts requested: 4/3/98; 10/9/98; 10/13/98; 11/13/98; 12/18/98. To Court Reporter: Patty Smith. | | 01-15167
|
| 09/14/2001 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Class Plaintiffs' Appeal and for Monetary Sanctions for Willful Refusal to Participate in NRAP Rule 16 Settlement Conference. | | 01-15570
|
| 09/17/2001 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order/Show Cause. On August 30, 2001, the settlement judge filed a settlement conference report with this court in which he determined that Daniel F. Polsenberg and Lynde Selden II, counsel for appellants, failed to participate in good faith in the settlement conference process. The settlement judge recommends the imposition of sanctions. Mr. Polsenberg and Mr. Selden shall have 15 days from the date of this order to show cause why this court should not act on the settlement judge's determination and recommendation. Nos. 37752/38045-these cases are not consolidated. | | 01-15645
|
| 09/19/2001 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Opposition to Motion for Extension of Time to File Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Class Plaintiffs' Appeal and for Monetary Sanctions. | | 01-15894
|
| 09/20/2001 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Class Plaintiffs' Appeal and for Monetary Sanctions. | | 01-15895
|
| 09/26/2001 | Motion | Filed Motion for Permission to File Document. Motion for Leave to File Reply to Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Monetary Sanctions. | | 01-16221
|
| 10/04/2001 | Motion | Filed Motion. Motion for Determination Regarding Conflict of Interest. | | 01-16723
|
| 10/04/2001 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. | | 01-16724
|
| 10/09/2001 | Transcript | Filed Transcript. Proceedings: 4/3/98; 10/9/98 (2); and 12/18/98. Court Reporter: Patsy K. Smith. | | 01-16974
|
| 10/11/2001 | Motion | Filed Motion to Strike. Motion to Strike Class Plaintiffs/Appellant's Motion for Determination Regarding Conflict of Interest. | | 01-17132
|
| 10/22/2001 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. | | 01-17766
|
| 07/17/2002 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. Order Imposing sanctions, Consolidating Appeals and Reinstating Briefing. The settlement judge has recommended the imposition of sanctions against attorneys Daniel Polsenberg and Lynde Selden II, counsel for appellants, for bad faith participation in the settlement conference process. Additionally, respondent Rio Development, Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss and for monetary sanctions for bad faith participation in the settlement conference process. Mr. Selden and Mr. Polsenberg oppose the settlement judge's recommendation and Rio Development's motion. fn1[We grant appellants' motion for an extension of time to file an opposition to Rio Development's motion for sanctions. We grant Rio development's motion for leave to file a reply to the opposition. The clerk of this court shall file the reply, attached as exhibit A to Rio Development's motion for leave to file a reply.] Mr. Selden and Mr. Polsenberg both assert that due to their inability to attend the conference, Mr. Semenza, an attorney they consider to be co-counsel in these appeals, agreed to attend the conference in their place. Mr. Semenza is not co-counsel in these appeals and had no duty to appear at the conference. We conclude that the imposition of sanctions against Mr. Selden and Mr. Polsenberg for their failure to appear at the mandatory settlement conference is warranted. Mr. Selden and Mr. Polsenberg shall each pay Rio Development $500, for a total of $1,000. fn2[We deny Rio Development's request for sanctions in the amount of $25,000. Any further request for attorney fees or sanctions will be considered, upon proper motion, after this court has issued a final decision in these appeals.] Within 20 days of the date of this order, Mr. Selden and Mr. Polsenberg shall file with the clerk of this court an affidavit or certificate verifying that payment has been made. We deny Rio Development's motion to dismiss this appeal. Mr. Polsenberg has filed a 'Motion for Determination Regarding conflict of Interest. This court does not issue advisory opinions. We deny the motion. fn3[We remind Mr. Polsenberg that he may seek guidance on this issue from the State Bar of Nevada.] We further deny as moot Rio Development's motion to strike appellants' motion for determination regarding conflict of interest. We deny appellants' request to reschedule these appeals for another settlement conference, and we reinstate the time deadlines for requesting and preparing transcripts and for filing briefs. We consolidate the above-entitled matters for all appellate purposes. Appellants shall have 15 days from the date of this order to comply with NRAP 9(a) in Docket no. 38045. Court reporter Kris Cornelius shall have 30 days from the date of this order to prepare and file the January 24, 2001 transcript requested on May 3, 2001 in Docket No. 37752. The court reporter shall inform this court in writing if the requested transcripts were previously prepared and filed the in the district court. Court reporter Patsy Smith need no produce a transcript for October 13, 1998, in Docket No. 38045. Rio Development shall have 10 days from the date of this order to file an amended transcript request form requesting the preparation of the November 13, 1998 transcript by court reporter Silvaggio in Docket No. 38045. Appellants: 120 days to file and serve a single opening brief and appendix addressing the issues raised in both appeals. Respondent/cross-appellant Rio Development: 30 days after service of the opening brief to file and serve a combined answering brief on appeal and opening brief on cross-appeal. Respondent Silver Canyon Partnership: 30 days after service of the opening brief to file an answring brief. Appellants: 30 days thereafter to file and serve a combined reply brief on appeal and answering brief on cross-appeal. Respondent/cross-appellant Rio Development: 30 days thereafter to file and serve a reply brief on cross-appeal. Nos. 37752/38045 (02-12252) | | |
| 07/17/2002 | Motion | Filed Reply to Response. Reply to Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Class Plaintiffs' Appeal and for Monetary Sanctions. (07/17/02 Order: detached and filed exhibit A from the Motion for Leave to File Reply to Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Monetary Sanctions filed 9/26/0 in Docket No. 38045). | | 02-12253
|
| 07/26/2002 | Transcript Request | Filed Request for Transcript of Proceedings. Transcripts requested: November 13, 1998. To Court Reporter: Renee Silvaggio. | | 02-12911
|
| 08/02/2002 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Proof of Payment of Sanction. Affidavit/Certification of Lynde Selden II Verifying Payment of Sanctions. Nos. 37752/38045 [02-13291] | | |
| 08/06/2002 | Notice/Incoming | Filed Proof of Payment of Sanction. Affidavit of Daniel F. Polsenberg for sanctions in the amount of $500.00 paid to Rio Development. Nos. 37752/38045 (02-13395). | | |
| 08/12/2002 | Transcript Request | Filed Certificate of No Transcript Request. Nos. 37752/38045 [02-13769] | | |
| 08/23/2002 | Letter/Incoming | Filed Letter. rom Court Reporter Kristine Cornelius. The transcript of 1/24/01 was previously prepared and filed in the district court. Nos. 37752/38045 [02-14548] | | |
| 08/29/2002 | Transcript Request | Filed Request for Transcript of Proceedings. Transcripts requested: 10/5/98 to 10/8/98. To Court Reporter: Patsy K. Smith. Nos. 37752/38045. [02-14993] | | |
| 09/20/2002 | Transcript | Filed Transcript. Proceedings: 10/05/98 (02); 10/06/98; and 10/08/98. Court Reporter: Patsy K. Smith. Nos. 37752/38045 (02-16379). | | |
| 11/18/2002 | Motion | Filed Stipulation and Order. Brief due: December 16, 2002. Nos. 37752/38045. | | |
| 12/18/2002 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Nos. 37752/38045 (02-21669) | | |
| 12/23/2002 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Opposition to Motion of Class Plaintiffs/Appellants for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief. Nos. 37752/38045 (02-21973). | | |
| 01/06/2003 | Other | Disqualification of Justice Gibbons. Sat in district court proceedings. | | |
| 01/08/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order/Show Cause. Appellants/cross-respondents shall have 30 days from the date of this order to show cause why their appeals in Docket No. 37752 and Docket No. 38045 should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Respondent/cross-appellant shall have 30 days from the date of this order to show cause why its cross-appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The briefing schedule in this appeal shall be suspended pending further order of this court. fn10[On June 1, 2001, Rio filed a motion to dismiss the appeal in Docket No. 37752. We defer ruling on that motion at this time.] Nos. 37752/38045. (03-00388) | | |
| 02/10/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. Appellant's/Cross-Respondents. Nos. 37752/38045 (03-02341). | | |
| 02/10/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. Rio Development, Inc.'s Response to Nevada Supreme Court's Order to Show Cause Dated January 8, 2003. Nos. 37752/38045 (03-02339). | | |
| 03/12/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. Order Granting Motion to Dismiss Appeal in Docket No. 37752 and Granting Request for Additional Time to Cure Jurisdictional Defect in Docket No. 38045. The appeals in Docket No. 37752 and Docket No. 38045 are consolidated. On June 1, 2001, Rio filed a motion to dismiss the appeal in Docket No. 37752. We deferred ruling on that motion pending receipt of Class Plaintiffs' response to our order to show cause. In Class Plaintiffs' response, they agree that the appeal in Docket No. 37752 was prematurely filed and should be dismissed. We grant Rio's motion to dismiss the appeal in Docket No. 37752. Rios response to our order to show cause in Docket No. 38045 acknowledges that 'there are not final orders or judgments for each and every claim asserted in the trial court below.' Rio states that it is 'prepared to live with' a dismissal of its cross-appeal as untimely. Class Plaintiffs also agree that their appeal is jurisdictionally defective and request 30 days in which to cure the apparent jurisdictional defect. We grant the request. Class Plaintiffs shall have 30 days from the date of this order to demonstrate to this court that they have cured all jurisdictional defects in Docket No. 38045. If Class Plaintiffs obtain a written order from the district court dismissing the remaining parties and/or claims, they must file an amended notice of appeal with the district court within the time frame set forth in NRAP 4(a)(1). Rio may also file any amended notice of appeal within the time frame of NRAP 4(a)(1). fn2[We caution the parties that we will not grant any further requests for an extension of time.] Nos. 37752/38045-cases are no longer consolidated. | | 03-04125
|
| 03/12/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. Supplement Response to Order to Show Cause (Appellants/Cross-Respondents). | | 03-04202
|
| 04/11/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Order to Show Cause. Second Supplemental Response to Order to Show Cause ("Class Plaintiffs"). | | 03-06109
|
| 04/14/2003 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Amended/Supplemental. (All class plaintiffs) | | 03-06334
|
| 06/02/2003 | Notice of Appeal Documents | Filed Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Amended/Supplemental. (Rio Development, Inc.) | | 03-09135
|
| 06/09/2003 | Other | Returned Mail. Receipt for Documents dated 06/02/03 and addressed to Lynde Selden, II at Selden Law Firm returned and remailed to Paustian Law Offices. | | |
| 06/18/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order/Briefing Reinstated. We ordered Class Plaintiffs and Rio to show cause why their respective appeals were jurisdictionally defective. On April 11, 2003, Class Plaintiffs filed a supplemental response to our order to show cause. Class Plaintiffs filed a timely amended notice of appeal in the district court. Subsequently, Rio filed a timely amended notice of appeal, thus perfecting its cross-appeal. As this matter may now proceed, we reinstate the briefing schedule. Class Plaintiffs shall have 45 days from the date of this order to file an opening brief and appendix. Rio shall have 30 days after service of the opening brief to file and serve a combined answering brief on appeal and opening brief on cross-appeal. Respondent Silver Canyon Partnership shall have 30 days after service of the opening brief to file an answering brief. Class Plaintiffs shall have 30 days thereafter to file and serve an answering brief on cross-appeal, combined with any reply brief on cross-appeal. Finally, Rio shall have 30 days thereafter to file and serve any reply brief on cross-appeal. fn1[See NRAP 31(a)(1); NRAP 28(c),(h). We caution the parties that no extensions shall be granted absent extreme and unforeseeable circumstances.] fn2[In light of this order, we deny as moot Class Plaintiffs' December 18, 2002 motion to extend time to file an opening brief.] | | 03-10158
|
| 08/06/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. (Filed in case no. 38045 only - case no. 37752 is closed). | | 03-13196
|
| 08/07/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. filed August 6, 2003. Appellants shall have until September 4, 2003, to file and serve the opening brief and appendix. | | 03-13249
|
| 08/08/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion to Dismiss Appeal. | | 03-13266
|
| 08/20/2003 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. | | 03-14052
|
| 09/08/2003 | Brief | Filed Opening Brief. Appellants Cross-Respondents. | | 03-15064
|
| 09/08/2003 | Appendix | Filed Joint Appendix. Vols. 1 through 8. | | 03-15065
|
| 09/11/2003 | Appendix | Filed Appendix. Supplement to Joint Appendix. Vols. 1 through 5. | | 03-15273
|
| 10/06/2003 | Brief | Filed Answering Brief. Respondent's Answering Brief and Cross-Appeal (RIO Development). | | 03-16602
|
| 10/09/2003 | Notice/Outgoing | Issued Notice of Modification of Caption. (Silver Canyon Partnership removed as a respondent from the Arellano appeal.) Parties are advised to notify this office in writing within 10 days if the caption as modified does not accurately reflect the status of the parties. | | |
| 11/07/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Motion for Extension of Time to File Combined Reply Brief and Answering Brief on Appeal. | | 03-18704
|
| 11/07/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Denying Motion. to Dismiss. On August 8, 2003, respondent/cross-appellant ("respondent") filed a motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to NRAP 31(c). Appellants oppose the motion. Having reviewed the motion and opposition, we conclude that dismissal of this appeal is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny respondent's motion to dismiss. | | 03-18708
|
| 11/25/2003 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. for extension of time. Appellants/cross-respondents ("appellants") have filed a motion for an extension of time to file a combined reply brief on appeal and answering brief on cross-appeal. We note that appellants have not demonstrated extreme and unforeseeable circumstances in support of their motion for an extension of time. Nevertheless, we grant the unopposed motion. 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. Appellants shall have until December 3, 2003, to file and serve a combined reply brief on appeal and answering brief on cross-appeal. Respondent/cross-appellant shall have 30 days from service of appellants' combined brief to file a reply brief on cross-appeal, if deemed necessary. | | 03-19671
|
| 12/08/2003 | Brief | Filed Reply Brief. Appellant's Combined Reply Brief and Answering Brief on Cross-Appeal. | | 03-20338
|
| 12/23/2003 | Motion | Filed Motion and Order Extending Time. Brief due: February 5, 2004. | | 03-21407
|
| 02/02/2004 | Brief | Filed Reply Brief on Cross-Appeal. | | 04-02106
|
| 02/04/2004 | Other | Other. Received Table of Contents and Table of Authorities to Reply Brief filed on 02/02/04. (Attached to inside front cover of original and copies of brief). | | |
| 04/19/2004 | Other | Disqualification of Justice Douglas. Sat in district court proceedings. | | |
| 06/01/2004 | Notice/Outgoing | Issued Letter. to Clark County Clerk regarding Transmission of Transcripts. | | |
| 06/07/2004 | Transcript | Filed Transcript. Proceedings: October 5, 1998 (At this time, proceedings were reported, but not transcribed.); October 5, 1998, 1:30 P.M.; October 6, 1998, 9:20 A.M.; and October 8, 1998 9:55 A.M. .Received from the Clark County Clerk. | | 04-10504
|
| 09/02/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order/Submit on Briefs. Order Submitting for Decision Without Oral Argument. Cause appearing, oral argument will not be scheduled and this appeal shall stand submitted for decision to the Northern Nevada Panel as of the date of this order on the briefs filed herein. See NRAP 34(f)(1). | | 04-15995
|
| 09/02/2004 | Case Status Update | Submitted for Decision. To the Northern Nevada Panel. NNP04-MS/NB/DA | | |
| 11/09/2004 | Order/Dispositional | Filed Order of Affirmance. "We affirm the district court's orders." NNP04-MS/NB/DA | | 04-20636
|
| 12/03/2004 | Motion | Filed Motion to Extend Time. Motion for Extension of Time to Petition this Court for Rehearing of Panel Decision. | | 04-22059
|
| 12/13/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Granting Motion. filed December 3, 2004. Appellants/cross-respondents shall have until January 3, 2005, to file and serve a petition for rehearing. | | 04-22655
|
| 12/13/2004 | Motion | Filed Response to Motion. Opposition to Respondent Rio Development, Inc. to Appellants' Untimely Motion for Extension of Time on Petition for Rehearing. | | 04-22742
|
| 12/23/2004 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order Denying Motion. filed December 13, 2004. We conclude that reconsideration of our order granting the motion is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny respondent's motion for reconsideration. | | 04-23384
|
| 01/19/2005 | Order/Procedural | Filed Order. On November 9, 2004, this court affirmed the orders of the district court. On December 3, 2004, appellants/cross-respondents ('appellants') filed a motion to extend the time to file a petition for rehearing. On December 13, 2004, we entered an order allowing appellants until January 3, 2005, to file and serve a petition for rehearing. Also on December 13, 2004, respondent/cross-appellant filed an opposition to appellants' motion for extension of time. We elected to treat the opposition as a motion for reconsideration of our order granting an extension of time and denied such motion. Therefore, appellants had until January 3, 2005, to file and serve a petition for rehearing. To date, appellants have not filed a petition for rehearing. Accordingly, we direct the clerk of this court to issue the remittitur in this appeal. | | 05-01216
|
| 01/19/2005 | Remittitur | Issued Remittitur. | | 05-01231
|
| 01/19/2005 | Case Status Update | Remittitur Issued/Case Closed. | | |
| 01/28/2005 | Remittitur | Filed Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on January 24, 2005. | | 05-01231
|