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 concerns the appointment of permanent co-guardians and a conservator for an individual alleged to be incapacitated. The appellant challenged the district court's decision to appoint these guardians and conservator, filing a motion for reconsideration shortly after the judgment.
Procedural History
- District Court, March 30, 2009: The district court issued an amended order appointing permanent co-guardians and a conservator for the alleged incapacitated person.
- District Court, April 9, 2009: The appellant filed a motion for reconsideration and requested a hearing on the motion.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant: Argued that the district court's decision to appoint permanent co-guardians and a conservator was incorrect and sought reconsideration of the judgment.
- Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the notice of appeal was premature due to the pending motion for reconsideration, rendering the district court's order non-final and unappealable.
Disposition
- The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as there was no final order in the case.
Reasons
Per Wechsler J. (Fry C.J. and Bustamante J. concurring):
The court emphasized that its jurisdiction is limited to final, appealable orders. A motion for reconsideration filed within ten days of the judgment is treated as a Rule 1-059(E) motion to alter or amend the judgment, which renders the judgment non-final until the motion is resolved. Since the appellant's motion for reconsideration was still pending when the notice of appeal was filed, the notice was deemed premature, and the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The court noted that the appellant could file a new notice of appeal once the district court ruled on the motion for reconsideration.