Full text
Cohen v. Goldin
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
BRUCE I. COHEN, No. 71084 vs. Appellant,
CYRUS I. GOLDIN; AND GERALDINE FILED H. GOLDIN, NOV 1 3 2017 Respondents. alZABETH A. BROWN CLE FqUPREME COURT
BY DEPUTY CLERK
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL AND REFERRING COUNSEL TO STATE BAR FOR INVESTIGATION
This is an appeal from a corrected decision and order granting in part a motion to retax costs and for attorney fees. Second Judicial District Court, Washoe County; Jerome M. Polaha, Judge. On July 5, 2017, we entered an order conditionally imposing sanctions on counsel for appellant, John A. Collier, for failure to file the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix.' The order indicated that the conditional sanction would be automatically vacated if Mr. Collier files and serves the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix or a motion to extend time within 11 days from date of the order. The order further cautioned that Mr. Collier's failure to comply with the order or any other filing deadlines would result in the dismissal of the appeal and the referral of Mr. Collier to the State Bar for investigation. On July 14, 2017, Mr. Collier filed a motion for an extension of time to file the transcript request form and opening brief and appendix. On July 31, 2017, this court entered an order granting the motion for extension
'A copy of this order is attached.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
((I) 1Y47A 0-386118
of time and indicating that, based on the timely filing of the motion for extension of time, the conditional sanction previously imposed had been automatically vacated. 2 The order directed Mr. Collier to file the transcript request form on or before August 15, 2017, and the opening brief and appendix on or before September 15, 2017. That order cautioned Mr. Collier that failure to comply could result in the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of the appeal. To date, Mr. Collier has failed to file the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix, or to otherwise communicate with this court. We have repeatedly stated that we expect all appeals to be "pursued in a manner meeting high standards of diligence, professionalism, and competence." Cuzdey v. State, 103 Nev. 575, 578, 747 P.2d 233, 235 (1987); accord Polk v. State, 126 Nev. 180, 184, 233 P.3d 357, 359 (2010); Barry v. Lindner, 119 Nev. 661, 671, 81 P.3d 537, 543 (2003); State, Nev. Emp't Sec. Dep't v. Weber, 100 Nev. 121, 123, 676 P.2d 1318, 1319 (1984). It is incumbent upon Mr. Collier, as part of his professional obligations of competence and diligence to his clients, to know and comply with all applicable court rules. See RPC 1.1; RPC 1.3. These rules have been implemented to promote cost-effective, timely access to the courts; it is "imperative" that he follow these rules and timely comply with our directives. Weddell v. Stewart, 127 Nev. 645, 650, 261 P.3d 1080, 1084 (2011). Mr. Collier is "not at liberty to disobey notices, orders, or any other directives issued by this court." Id. at 652, 261 P.3d at 1085. Mr. Collier's failure to comply with our rules and orders has forced this court to divert our limited resources to ensure his compliance
2A copy of this order is attached.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(th 1907A e 2
— 3 —
and needlessly delayed the processing of this appeal. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal. Because it appears that Mr. Collier's conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), we refer Mr. Collier to the State Bar of Nevada for investigation pursuant to SCR 104-105. It is so ORDERED.
SCL,t J. Hardesty
J. Parraguirre Stiglich
cc: Hon. Jerome M. Polaha, District Judge Margaret Crowley, Settlement Judge Kalicki Collier, PLLC John A. Collier Robison, Simons, Sharp & Brust Stan Hunterton, Bar Counsel Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 194Th (e).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
BRUCE I. COHEN, No. 71084 Appellant, vs. CYRUS I. GOLDIN; AND GERALDINE FILED H. GOLDIN, JUL 0 5 2017 Respondents. ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT By SA/Net.A./r4e. DEPUTY CLERK
ORDER CONDITIONALLY IMPOSING SANCTIONS
On April 26, 2017, this court entered an order denying respondents' motion to dismiss the appeal; granting appellant's motion for an extension of time to file and serve the opening brief and appendix; and directing appellant, within II days, to file a transcript request form that complies with NRAP 9(a)(3)(C)(v), Pursuant to our order, the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix were due no later than May 8, 2017. We cautioned appellant that failure to timely comply with this order could result in the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of this appeal.' NRAP 9(a)(7); NRAP 3I(d). To date appellant has not filed the documents or otherwise . communicated with this court, and respondents have filed a notice of non- compliance requesting that this court impose sanctions on appellant pursuant to NRAP 9(a)(7) and NRAP 31(d). We conclude that appellant's failure to file the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix warrants the conditional
"A copy of the order is attached.
SUPREME COURT Or NEVADA
(0) 194M I 17-2 zoo
imposition of sanctions. Counsel for appellant, John A. Collier, shall pay the sum of $250 to the Supreme Court Law Library and provide this court with proof of such payment within 15 days from the date of this order. The conditional sanction will be automatically vacated if Mr. Collier files and serves the transcript request form and the opening brief and appendix or a motion to extend time that complies with NRAP 31(b)(3) within 11 days from the date of this order. If the required documents are not timely filed, the sanction will no longer be conditional and must be paid. Failure to comply with this order or any other filing deadlines will result in the dismissal of this appeal. Further, because it appears that• Mr. Collier's conduct in this appeal may constitute violations of RPC 1.3 (diligence), 3.2(a) (expediting litigation), and 8.4 (misconduct), failure to comply with this order or any other filing deadlines will also result in Mr. Collier's referral to the State Bar of Nevada for investigation pursuant to SCR 104-105. It is so ORDERED. 2
,J. Hardesty
phoam-Stra7. ACibaj , J. Parraguirre Stiglich
We decline, at this time, to impose additional sanctions pursuant to 2 respondents' motion.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A .43:3),• 2
cc: Kalicki Collier, PLLC Robison Belaustegui Sharp & Low John Collier Supreme Court Law Librarian
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) I947A ce 3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
BRUCE I. COHEN, No. 71084 Appellant, vs. CYRUS I. GOLDIN; AND GERALDINE FILED H. GOLDIN, JUL 3 1 2017 Respondents. ELIZAK75 .1 A. BROWN CLERVz 1.JPREME COURT BY • ORDER GRANTING MOTION DEPUTY CLERK
Cause appearing, appellant's motion requesting an extension of time to file the transcript request form and opening brief and appendix is granted to the following extent. NRAP 31(b)(3)(B). Appellant shall have 15 days from the date of this order to file and serve a transcript request form that complies with NRAP 9(a)(3)(C). Appellant shall have until September 15, 2017, to file and serve the opening brief and appendix. No further extensions of time shall be permitted absent demonstration of extiaordinary circumstances and extreme need, and in no instance will a further extension be granted on the ground that the transcripts have not been prepared. Id. Counsel's caseload normally will not be deemed such a circumstance. Cf. Varnum u. Grady, 90 Nev. 374, 528 P.2d 1027 (1974). Failure to comply , with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions, including the dismissal of this appeal.' It is so ORDERED.
, C.J.
'Because appellant timely filed a motion for an extension of time, the conditional sanction imposed in our July 5, 2017, order was automatically vacated. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
A)) I 9474 Ae4357 7. z5-13say
cc: Kalicki Collier, PLLC Robison Belaustegui Sharp & Low
2 4.66“1 .....7:;a:7WIEW4warAtaltiktig
Telephonic Extension 5 day extension for any document due EXCEPT filing fee. C-Track -> Case notes "5 day ext. granted for document"
Approved: C-Track -> case note -> "5 day extension granted for document" Prepare Clerk order. See NRAP 26(b)(1)(B) 5 day ext rule for all documents EXCEPT fast track cases.
See NRAP 3C(i)(2)(A) 5 day ext rule for criminal fast track cases.
See NRAP 3E(f)(2) 5 day ext rule for child custody fast track cases.
Petition for Rehearings Okay to do a 5 day extension. Original due date is 18 days from dispo date. NO 3 day mailing exception to due dates.
Motions Response to a motion is 7 judicial days from file date. le: motion filed 4/21/14, response due 4/30. NRAP 27(a)(3). (11 day rule — NRAP 26a) If response attorney is NOT an e-filer, 3 day mail rule will apply to due date 7 days to file a response to motion + 3 days mailing exception = 10 judicial days le: motion filed on 4/21/14, response will be due on 5/5
Court of Appeals: Send all telephonic requests to Tom.
3/17/14 Rev. 5/1/14