AI Generated Opinion Summaries

Decision Information

Decision Content

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

  • The case involves an appeal by the self-represented Respondent, Feather Russell, against orders issued by the district court on July 26, 2017, and an amended order on August 3, 2017. The appeal concerns the district court's handling of a motion to reconsider, which was purportedly not resolved by a final written order (para 1).

Procedural History

  • District Court of Grant County, July 26, 2017: Issued an order.
  • District Court of Grant County, August 3, 2017: Issued an amended order.
  • District Court of Grant County, November 7, 2017: Issued an order on Respondent’s October 26, 2017, motion to reconsider, which did not address the August 3, 2017, motion for reconsideration (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

  • Petitioner-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
  • Respondent-Appellant: Argued that the district court failed to issue a final written order resolving the August 3, 2017, motion to reconsider (para 1).

Legal Issues

  • Whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of a final order due to the district court not issuing a final written order resolving the August 3, 2017, motion to reconsider (para 2).

Disposition

  • The appeal was dismissed for lack of a final order (para 2).

Reasons

  • Per J. Miles Hanisee, with concurrence from Linda M. Vanzi, Chief Judge, and Emil J. Kiehne, Judge: The Court of Appeals decided to dismiss the appeal due to the absence of a final written order on the Respondent's motion to reconsider dated August 3, 2017. The Court noted that the Respondent filed a memorandum in opposition to the proposed summary disposition, which included the district court's November 7, 2017, order on a motion to reconsider dated October 26, 2017. However, this did not address the lack of a final written order for the August 3, 2017, motion, leading to the dismissal of the appeal (paras 1-2).
 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.