ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL
This is a pro se appeal from short trial judge orders denying a motion for new trial and denying a motion for partial summary judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Kenneth Weissman, Short Trial Judge.
Preliminary review of the docketing statement and documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals jurisdictional defects. Specifically, it appears that the district court has not yet entered a written order denying a new trial or denying partial summary judgment because the district court judge did not sign the appealed short trial orders, which is necessary for appeal purposes. NRAP 3A(b)(2); NSTR 33. Under NSTR 3(d), pro tempore short trial judges’ proposed orders are not effective until signed by the district court. NSTR 3(d)(4).
Additionally, even had the district court judge signed the challenged orders, they are not substantively appealable. See NSTR 33 (allowing an appeal from a final judgment in a case within the short trial program); Reno Hilton Resort Corp. v. Verderber, 121 Nev. 1, 106 P.3d 134 (2005) (NRAP 3A(b)(2) allowing for an appeal from an order granting or refusing to grant a new trial does not permit an appeal from an order granting or denying a new trial motion addressed to an interlocutory order or judgment); Algood v. State, 78 Nev. 326, 328, 372 P.2d 466, 467 (1962) (a jury verdict is not a final judgment); Cromer v. Wilson, 126 Nev. 106, 109, 225 P.3d 788, 790 (2010) (an order denying summary judgment is not independently appealable). This court lacks jurisdiction and ORDERS this appeal DISMISSED.
Herndon, J.
Lee, J.
Bell, J.