Zandian v. Margolin ( 2016 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
REZA ZANDIAN, A/K/A GOLAMREZA No. 69372
ZANDIANJAZI, A/KJA GHOIAM REZA
ZANDIAN, A/K/A REZA JAZI, A/K/A J.
REZA JAZI, AJK/A G. REZA JAZI, A/K/A
GHONOREZA ZANDIAN JAZI, AN
FILED
INDIVIDUAL, MAR 0 4 2016
Appellant,
TRACE K. UNDEMAN
vs. CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
BY _.52_Yerft,„
JED MARGOLIN, AN INDIVIDUAL, DEPUTY CLERK
Respondent.
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
This is an appeal from an order granting a motion requiring
appellant to appear for a debtor's examination and to produce documents.
First Judicial District Court, Carson City; James Todd Russell, Judge.
Because it appeared from our preliminary review that no
statute or court rule provides for an appeal from an order requiring a
debtor's examination or production of documents, we directed appellant to
show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction. See NRAP 3A(b)(1); Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100
Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984); see also Wczrdleigh v. Second Judicial
Dist. Court In & For Cty. of Washoe, 111 Nev. 345, 351, 891 P.2d 1180,
1184 (1995) (a writ of prohibition will issue to prevent discovery required
by court order entered in excess of the court's jurisdiction). Appellant has
responded to our order, and respondent has filed a reply.
Appellant concedes that no statute or rule specifically provides
for an appeal from the order at issue, but argues that thefl order constitutes
a special order after final judgment pursuant to Gumm v. Mainor, 118
Nev. 912, 59 P.3d 1220 (2002) because it "affects the Appellant's rights
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A 7 e 1C,-070(al
relative to Respondent's rights to execute the judgment." We disagree.
"[T]o be appealable under NRAP 3A(b)(2), a special order after final
judgment must be an order affecting the rights of some party to the action,
growing out of the judgment previously entered. It must be an order
affecting rights incorporated in the judgment." Id. at 914, 59 P.3d at 1221;
see also Wilkinson v. Wilkinson, 73 Nev. 143, 145, 311 P.2d 735, 736 (1957)
(the order "must affect the rights of the parties growing out of final
judgment."). Any rights respondent has to execute upon the judgment
arise out of the final judgment itself, not from the order directing a
debtor's examination.
As a result, we conclude that this court lacks jurisdiction over
this appeal, and we
ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.'
(hSZA
Cherry
cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge
Kaempfer Crowell/Reno
Kaempfer Crowell/Carson City
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP/Reno
Carson City Clerk
'We deny as moot appellant's counsel's motion to withdraw.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A
2