judyrecords
600 million+
United States Court Cases

Nevada Supreme/Appellate Court Record

HART VS. CLARK COUNTY TREASURER

Case Information: 38272
Short Caption:HART VS. CLARK COUNTY TREASURERCourt:Supreme Court
Lower Court Case(s):Clark Co. - Eighth Judicial District - A430371Classification:Civil Appeal - Family Law - Proper Person
Disqualifications:Case Status:Remittitur Issued/Case Closed
Replacement:Panel Assigned: Panel
To SP/Judge:SP Status:
Oral Argument:Oral Argument Location:
Submission Date:06/07/2002How Submitted:On Record

+ Party Information

Docket Entries
DateTypeDescriptionPending?Document
08/03/2001Filing Fee Filing Fee due.
08/03/2001Notice of Appeal DocumentsFiled Certified Copy of Notice of Appeal/Proper Person. Appeal docketed in the Supreme Court this day. 01-13155
08/03/2001Notice/OutgoingIssued Notice to Pay Supreme Court Filing Fee. Due Date: 10 days
08/28/2001Order/ProceduralFiled Order Denying Motion. We deny without prejudice appellants' motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Appellants must first seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court. Failure either to properly seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court or to pay the filing fee may result in the immediate dismissal of this appeal. fn1[Although appellants were not granted leave to file papers in proper person, we have considered the proper person documents received from appellants.] 01-14592
10/22/2001MotionFiled Motion. Motion to Deny Plaintiffs' forma Pauperis Status. 01-17739
03/14/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order. Granting Motion to Deny in Forma Pauperis Status, Directing Payment of Filing Fee, and Denying Motion to Strike. fn1[Although appellants were not granted leave to file papers in proper person, we have considered the proper person documents received from them.] As appellants have not demonstrated that they are entitled to proceed in forma pauperis, we grant respondent's motion and vacate the district court's order granting in forma pauperis status to appellants. We direct appellants to pay the filing of $200 within 10 days of the date of this order. Failure to pay the fee may result in the dismissal of this appeal as abandoned. Appellants' motion to strike is denied. fn3[Although NRAP 24 does not specifically provide for respondent's motion, we have previously considered a motion seeking to correct a district court's order that did not comply with applicable rules, when the order was not itself appealable but was related to the pending appeal. Here, appellants failed to comply with NRS 12.015 and NRAP 24; accordingly, the district court's order granting in forma pauperis status was in error.] 02-04633
04/10/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order Denying Motion. Denying Motion for Reconsideration. On March 14, 2002, we entered an order denying appellants leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directing them to pay the filing fee within 10 days. Appellants have submitted a motion for reconsideration, in which they repeat their previous arguments and provide additional description of their religious beliefs. fn1[Although appellants were not granted leave to file papers in proper person, see NRAP 46(b), we have considered the proper person documents received from them.] We deny the motion. Appellants shall have 10 days within which to pay the filing fee of $200. Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this appeal. 02-06336
04/22/2002Filing FeeReceived Filing Fee Paid on Filing. $200.00 from Robert Hart -check no. 1715.
05/20/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order/Transmit Record and Directing Response. Original record due: 30 days. fn2[NRAP 11(a)(2) (the complete record shall contain each and every paper, pleading and other document filed, or submitted for filing, in the district court, as well as any previously prepared transcripts of the district court proceedings).] fn3[The record shall not include any exhibits filed in the district court.] 02-08882
06/07/2002Record on Appeal DocumentsFiled Record on Appeal. 02-09997
06/07/2002Case Status Update Submitted for Decision.
10/18/2002Order/ProceduralFiled Order. Directing Response. Respondent shall have 20 days from this order's date within which to demonstrate why the district court's sanction order should not be reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. 02-18131
11/01/2002MotionFiled Response to Order to Show Cause. 02-18850
12/06/2002Order/DispositionalFiled Dispositional Order/Appeal. Dismissing in Part and Reversing and Remanding in Part. This court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal from the dismissal of appellant's complaint, and " . . . we order this appeal dismissed to that extent . . . we vacate the award, reverse the judgment, and remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this order." fn15[Although appellants have not been granted permission to file documents in this matter in proper person, see NRAP 46(b), we have received and considered appellants' proper person documents.] NNP03Y-CY/RR/DA 02-20904
12/31/2002RemittiturIssued Remittitur. Returned Record on Appeal this day. 02-21241
12/31/2002Case Status Update Remittitur Issued/Case Closed.
01/07/2003Other Returned Unfiled Document. Original document entitled, "Bill of Exceptions (Demand for findings of facts and conclusions of substantive law-Common law Brief.)
01/24/2003RemittiturFiled Remittitur. Received by County Clerk on January 3, 2003. 02-21241