From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels

Supreme Court of Nevada
Mar 30, 1984
100 Nev. 207 (Nev. 1984)

Summary

recognizing that this court has jurisdiction to consider only those appeals that are authorized by a statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Vu v. Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

Opinion

No. 15178

March 30, 1984

Appeal from order denying motion for summary judgment, Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Paul S. Goldman, Judge.

Thorndal, Backus Maupin, Las Vegas, for Appellant.

Rawlings, Olson Cannon, Las Vegas, for Respondents.


OPINION


This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for summary judgment. Respondents have moved to dismiss this appeal, contending that such an order is not appealable despite the certification of finality pursuant to NRCP 54(b). We agree.

NRCP 54(b) provides in part:

When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action . . . the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims . . . only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. . . .

NRAP 3A(b) designates the judgments and orders from which an appeal may be taken, and where no statutory authority to appeal is granted, no right exists. Kokkos v. Tsalikis, 91 Nev. 24, 530 P.2d 756 (1975). The denial of a motion for summary judgment is not a final judgment under the rule. Smith v. Hamilton, 70 Nev. 212, 265 P.2d 214 (1953) (decided under indentical provision of former NRCP 72(b)).

The district court, upon motion by appellant, inserted the following language into the order denying appellant's motion for summary judgment:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that there appearing no just cause for delay, this denial of the motion for summary judgment is certified as final for the purposes of the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 54(b).

The district court, through such certification, cannot create finality when the order is not amenable to certification. See Mid-Century Ins. Co. v. Cherubini, 95 Nev. 293, 593 P.2d 1068 (1979); Las Vegas Hacienda v. G.L.M.M. Corp., 93 Nev. 177, 561 P.2d 1334 (1977). The district court does not have the power, even when a motion for certification is unopposed, to transform an interlocutory order which does not come within the rule, into a final judgment. An NRCP 54(b) certification is not available to provide interlocutory appellate review of an order which does not constitute a final adjudication of fewer than all claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties in an action. Painton Company v. Bourns, Inc., 442 F.2d 216, 234 (2nd Cir. 1971). The order at issue in this appeal was a refusal by the district court to adjudicate the rights and liabilities of Taylor Construction Company and clearly is not a judgment which is amenable to certification pursuant to NRCP 54(b).

The district court was without authority to direct the entry of a final judgment as to the order from which this appeal is taken; therefore, the order is not appealable and we are without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

The erroneous certification by the trial court will not preclude appellant from raising its challenge to the order in a timely appeal from a final judgment. See Page v. Preisser, 585 F.2d 336 (8th Cir. 1978).


Summaries of

Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels

Supreme Court of Nevada
Mar 30, 1984
100 Nev. 207 (Nev. 1984)

recognizing that this court has jurisdiction to consider only those appeals that are authorized by a statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Vu v. Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

recognizing that generally this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from RG Elec., Inc. v. Cole

recognizing that, generally, this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Walters v. Rail City Casino

recognizing that, generally, this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from McGary v. James

recognizing that an appeal may only be taken when authorized by a statute or rule

Summary of this case from Cheyenne Apartments PPG, LP v. State Dep't of Transp.

recognizing that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from In re Guardianship of N.S

pointing out that, generally, this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Superpumper, Inc. v. Leonard

noting that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Sheridan v. Goff

noting that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Sheridan v. Goff

stating that " NRCP 54(b) certification is not available to provide interlocutory appellate review of an order which does not constitute a final adjudication of fewer than all claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties in an action"

Summary of this case from JJND Enters., LLC v. Bank of Am.

stating that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Yu v. Yu

providing that the right to appeal is statutory; where no statute or court rule authorizes an appeal, no right to an appeal exists

Summary of this case from TRP Int'l, Inc. v. Proimtu MMI LLC

noting that this court generally has authority to consider an appeal only when authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Kaviani v. Vaziri

noting that this court generally has authority to consider an appeal only when authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Kaviani v. Vaziri

stating that a court cannot create finality through NRCP 54(b) certification when an order is not amenable to certification

Summary of this case from Kaviani v. Vaziri

noting that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from King v. Corp. of the Presiding Bishop of the Churhc of Lattter sents

providing that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Bumb v. Young

stating that a court cannot create finality through NRCP 54(b) certification when an order is not amenable to certification

Summary of this case from Bumb v. Young

noting that an appeal may only be taken when authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Hughes v. Johnson

noting that an appeal may only be taken when authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Vela v. Grainger's

stating that a court cannot create finality through NRCP 54(b) certification when an order is not amenable to certification

Summary of this case from Kim v. Meadowood Mall, Spe, LLC

noting that an appeal may only be taken when authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Edwards v. Merback (In re Forma Pauperis Request)

providing that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Estate of Black v. Black

explaining that this court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Pletcher v. Boulevard Theater, LLC

providing that this court generally has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule

Summary of this case from Woods v. Nestle Corp.
Case details for

Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels

Case Details

Full title:TAYLOR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION, DBA…

Court:Supreme Court of Nevada

Date published: Mar 30, 1984

Citations

100 Nev. 207 (Nev. 1984)
678 P.2d 1152

Citing Cases

Kaviani v. Vaziri

And although the family court certified its November 14, 2014, order as final, the certification was improper…

Tanner v. Jeske

Perceiving a jurisdictional defect, this court entered an order to show cause, noting that the final judgment…