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 the appellant, Howard Johnson, appealing pro se from the district court's ruling concerning child support and custody issues.
Procedural History
- [Not applicable or not found]
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant: Howard Johnson did not file a memorandum in opposition to the court's notice proposing dismissal for lack of finality. Additionally, he submitted a "motion for production and pretrial matters" on February 15, 2011.
- Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the appeal should be dismissed for lack of finality.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of finality.
Reasons
-
VIGIL, Judge (SUTIN, J., and VANZI, J., concurring): The court decided to dismiss the appeal due to lack of finality, as indicated in their March 8, 2011, notice. The appellant's failure to file a memorandum in opposition to the notice was interpreted as acceptance of the proposed disposition, following the precedent set in Frick v. Veazey. Furthermore, the court stated it lacked jurisdiction to consider the appellant's motion for production and pretrial matters due to the dismissal's nature.
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.