DocketNumber: 69372
Filed Date: 3/4/2016
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
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