United Healthcare Ins. Co. v. Fremont Emergency Servs. (Mandavia), Ltd.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE No. 84558
COMPANY, A CONNECTICUT
CORPORATION; UNITED
HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., D/B/A
UNITEDHEALTHCARE, A FLEÎ
MINNESOTA CORPORATION; UMR,
INC., D/B/A UNITED MEDICAL SEP 2 9 2022
RESOURCES, A DELAWARE (ewAvarr
CLEM< 0i4 ."-","1: • 'atiRT
CORPORATION; SIERRA HEALTH
°LPL a CLERK
AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
INC., A NEVADA CORPORATION; AND
HEALTH PLAN OF NEVADA, INC., A
NEVADA CORPORATION,
Appellants,
vs.
FREMONT EMERGENCY SERVICES
(MANDAVIA), LTD., A NEVADA
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION;
TEAM PHYSICIANS OF NEVADA-
MANDAVIA, P.C., A NEVADA
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION; AND
CRUM, STEFANKO AND JONES, LTD.,
D/B/A RUBY CREST EMERGENCY
MEDICINE, A NEVADA
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION,
Res • ondents.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
- 3o 5-6-ni
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
This is an appeal from a judgment on a jury verdict. Eighth
Judicial District Court, Clark County; Nancy L. Allf, Judge.
When initial review of the notice of appeal revealed a
jurisdictional defect, this court ordered appellants to show cause why this
appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In particular, it
appeared that the notice of appeal was prematurely filed in the district
court after the filing of timely tolling motions but before those motions were
formally resolved in a written order entered by the district court. See NRAP
4(a)(6). In response, appellants explain that the district court has entered
an order resolving the motion for relief under NRCP 59(e), but has yet to
resolve the motions seeking relief under NRCP 50(b) and NRCP 59(a).
Appellants have also filed an amended notice of appeal challenging the
denial of the motion seeking NRCP 59(e) relief, and orders awarding
attorney fees and costs.
Appellants do not dispute that the notice of appeal was
prematurely filed after the timely filing of tolling motions and before those
motions were resolved in a written order entered by the district court. See
NRAP 4(a)(4); NRAP 4(a)(6). And appellants concede that two of those
motions remain pending in the district court. This court therefore lacks
jurisdiction to consider the appeal from the judgment on jury verdict. See
NRAP 4(a)(6) ("A premature notice of appeal does not divest the district
court of jurisdiction."). For the same reason, this court lacks jurisdiction to
consider the appeal from the orders awarding attorney fees and costs
identified in the amended notice of appeal. See Winston Prods. Co. v.
DeBoer, 122 Nev. 517, 526, 314 P.3d 726, 732 (2006) (holding that timely
SUPREME COUR1
OF
NEVADA
2
111) PR7A
filed tolling motions toll the time to appeal from both the final judgment
and special orders after final judgment). Accordingly, this court
ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.'
Cadish
, J.
cc: Hon. Nancy L. Allf, District Judge
Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge
Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP/Las Vegas
O'Melveny & Myers LLP/Los Angeles
Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial, LLC/Las Vegas
O'Melveny & Myers LLP/Wash DC
O'Melveny & Myers LLP/New York
McDonald Carano LLP/Las Vegas
Lash & Goldberg LLP/Ft. Lauderdale
Bailey Kennedy
Ahmad, Zavistanos, Anaipakos, Alavi & Mensing, P.C./Houston
Eighth District Court Clerk
'The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in this
matter under a general order of assignment.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
I, iO47A •