Nevada family-law case summaries

This case involves an appeal that never got off the ground because required paperwork was never properly filed. After a divorce, the family court ordered Anita A. Fors to pay attorney fees, and she appealed that order without a lawyer. To move an appeal forward, a party must file a document called a "docketing statement" - a form the appeals court uses to get basic information about the case. The court set a series of deadlines for Fors to file this document correctly. According to the opinion, the court gave her notice on April 3, 2026, to file the docketing statement by April 24, 2026. She attempted to file it on April 25, one day late, and the court rejected it on April 28 as both untimely and deficient (not meeting the rules). The opinion describes several more rounds of attempts and rejections. On April 30, she filed the docketing statement with a motion for an extension of time attached, but on May 4 the court struck both documents because the docketing statement was still deficient and because the two items had to be filed separately rather than combined. She tried again on May 7, and the court struck the motion for extension of time as deficient. When she still did not file a corrected docketing statement or a proper motion for more time, the court issued another order on May 20, 2026, giving her seven more days and warning that failure to comply could result in dismissal. The opinion states that, as of the date of the order, Fors had still not filed the docketing statement. Concluding that she appeared to have abandoned the appeal, the court dismissed it.

This is a very short order from the Nevada Supreme Court in a family-law case between Brandi A. Samaan and Ramy F. Samaan. One party had appealed, and the other had filed a cross-appeal (a counter-appeal by the opposing party in the same case). Before the court decided the merits, the two parties reached an agreement to end the appeal. This kind of agreement is called a stipulation - a joint request by both sides asking the court to take a particular action. Based on that stipulation, the court dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal, meaning the case ends without a ruling on the issues that were raised. The court also directed that each side pay its own court costs and attorney fees, rather than requiring one party to reimburse the other. The order does not explain what the underlying dispute was about or how the family court below had ruled.