ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
This is a pro se appeal from a district court order granting a motion to dismiss. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Jacqueline M. Bluth, Judge.
Review of the notice of appeal and documents before this court reveals a jurisdictional defect. The notice of appeal was prematurely filed in the district court after the filing of a timely tolling motion seeking reconsideration, but before entry of a written order finally resolving that tolling motion. See NRAP 4(a)(4), (6) (regarding tolling motions); AA Primo Builders LLC v. Washington, 126 Nev. 578, 585, 245 P.3d 1190, 1195 (2010) (describing when a post-judgment motion carries tolling effect). To date, it appears the tolling motion remains pending in the district court. 1
As this court lacks jurisdiction over a premature notice of appeal, NRAP 4(a)(6), we
ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.
2
Cadish, J.
Pickering, J.
Bell, J.
FOOTNOTES
1
. It appears the district court issued a minute order on December 11, 2023, denying the motion for reconsideration. However, the minute order is without effect. Div. of Child & Family Servs. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 445, 454, 92 P.3d 1239, 1245 (2004) (“[D]ispositional court orders that are not administrative in nature, but deal with the procedural posture or merits of the underlying controversy, must be written, signed, and filed before they become effective”). 2
. Appellant may file a new notice of appeal once the district court enters a written order finally resolving the tolling motion.Given this dismissal, this court takes no action on appellants pro se transcript request form or motion for stay.