Fielden Hanson Isaacs Miyada Robison Yeh, Ltd. Vs. Tang, M.D.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

FIELDEN HANSON ISAACS MIYADA No. 78358 ROBISON YEH, LTD., Appellant, FILED vs. DEVIN CHERN TANG, M.D.; AND SUN AUG 1 2 2020 ANESTHESIA SOLUTIONS, A ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF pypfera couRT NEVADA CORPORATION, BY 6 1 Res • ondents. DEFtflYCLERK

FIELDEN HANSON ISAACS MIYADA No, 796634' ROBISON YEH, LTD., Appellant, vs. DEVIN CHERN TANG, M.D.; AND SUN ANESTHESIA SOLUTIONS, A NEVADA CORPORATION, Res s ondents.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

These cases present related interlocutory appeals frorn a district court order denying a motion for preliminary injunction. and a subsequent order denying a motion for reconsideration, in a restrictive covenant dispute. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Timothy C. Williams, Judge. The covenant at issue purported to prevent respondent, Dr. Devin Chern Tang, from independently providing anesthesiology services to any client of appellant, Fielden Hanson Isaacs, Miyada, Robinson, Yoh, Ltd. (FHIMRY), without geographic limitation. Accordingly, the district court refused to enforce the covenant as overbroad. FHIMRY timely appealed, but did not attempt to expedite the appellate process, during which time the covenant expired. This court thus issued an order to show cause why it should not dismiss the appeals as moot. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A .411P1.• 020-020 70 7 •

FHIRMY answered this court's order, arguing that the appeals fell within an exception to mootness because they raise a matter of widespread importance that is capable of repetition yet evading review. See Langston v. State, Dep't of Motor Vehicles, 110 Nev. 342, 344, 871 P.2d 362, 363 (1994). There is one obvious flaw in this proposition, however— currently pending before this court is a third appeal involving FHIRMY, presenting the same legal issue that they assert deserves resolution. This third appeal is not moot, has been briefed, and is set On an expedited schedule. Under these circumstances, FHIRMY cannot demonstrate the issue is likely to evade review. See Valdez-Jimenez v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. „ 460 P.3d 976, 982 (2020). Accordingly, we ORDER these appeals DISMISSED.

A'asba,-.0 Stiglich

Silver

cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Dickinson Wright PLLC Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A agAID

, : . •