Nev. R. App. P. 31
ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOTE
The amendments to Rule 31 clarify its scope and revise the process for seeking extensions of briefing deadlines.
Subdivision (a) clarifies that Rule 31 does not govern the briefing schedule in fast track appeals. Because appeals involving child custody and visitation are now governed by Rule 3E, subdivision (a)(2) now governs the briefing schedule only for termination of parental rights cases. Former subdivision (a)(4) (postconviction appeals in capital cases) is now subsumed within subdivision (a)(1), which adheres to the same deadlines as the eliminated subdivision.
Subdivision (b)(1) replaces the provisions on telephonic and stipulated extensions with a 30-day streamlined extension, akin to the streamlined extension available in the Ninth Circuit under 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2(a). Subdivision (b)(2) eliminates inconsistent standards for extensions by motion. Subdivision (b)(3) makes clear that extensions beyond the streamlined extension permitted by subdivision (b)(2) are disfavored. In cases except termination of parental rights and direct-appeal capital cases, a motion for an extension must demonstrate good cause. In termination of parental rights cases, the motion must demonstrate extraordinary and compelling circumstances. The court retains discretion to prescribe another standard in particular cases. Supplemental authorities, formerly addressed in subdivision (e), now appear in Rule 28(j), similar to FRAP 28(j).