Taylor Const. Co. v. Hilton Hotels Corp.
| Decision Date | 30 March 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 15178,15178 |
| Citation | 678 P.2d 1152,100 Nev. 207 |
| Parties | TAYLOR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Appellant, v. HILTON HOTELS CORPORATION, d/b/a Las Vegas Hilton and Las Vegas International Hotel Corporation, Inc., Respondents. |
| Court | Nevada Supreme Court |
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). 1 We agree.
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) ().
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 (2d 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...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Settelmeyer & Sons v. Smith & Harmer
...party to an independent suit against the receivership corporation only when formally made a party). 5. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 209, 678 P.2d 1152, 1153 (1984). 6. See Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000). 7. Alper v. Posin, 77 Nev. 328, 3......
-
Las Vegas Police Prot. Ass'n v. Dist. Ct.
...1 (2000) (noting "that if appellate jurisdiction were proper, then writ relief would be inappropriate"). 7. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). 8. Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 426, 996 P.2d 416, 417 (2000). 9. 116 Nev. 646, 5 P.3d 569 (2000). 10. Id.......
-
Sustainable Growth v. Jumpers, LLC
...issue. 51. Boulder City v. Cinnamon Hills Assocs., 110 Nev. 238, 245, 871 P.2d 320, 324 (1994). 52. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 209, 678 P.2d 1152, 1153 (1984) (denial of summary judgment is not final and not amenable to NRCP Rule 54(b) certification). 53. The distric......
-
Ford v. Showboat Operating Co.
...appeal exists. State, Taxicab Authority v. Greenspun, 109 Nev. 1022, 1024-25, 862 P.2d 423, 424 (1993); Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 209, 678 P.2d 1152, 1153 (1984); Kokkos v. Tsalikis, 91 Nev. 24, 530 P.2d 756 Further, NRAP 4(a)(1) provides that a notice of appeal mus......