Olson v. OlsonAnnotate this Case
Tracy A. Olson,
Petitioner and Appellee,
Franchot L. Olson,
Respondent and Appellant.
(Not For Official Publication)
Case No. 20010390-CA
F I L E D
July 6, 2001 2001 UT App 218 -----
Second District, Farmington
The Honorable Thomas L. Kay
Franchot L. Olson, Roy, Appellant Pro Se
Chad B. McKay, Ogden, for Appellee
Before Judges Greenwood, Jackson, and Davis.
Mr. Olson filed a notice of appeal on April 27, 2001, seeking to appeal a March 26, 2001 order on attorney fees, a March 13, 2001 order granting the bifurcated divorce, and other earlier orders of the trial court.
There are two problems with Mr. Olson's appeal. First, the orders he seeks to appeal are interim, nonfinal orders. See A.J. Mackay Co. v. Okland Constr. Co., 817 P.2d 323, 325 (Utah 1991) (stating under final judgment rule, upon which Utah R. App. P. 3 is based, parties may not appeal judgments or orders that are not final). The March 26 order is an interim attorney fee order. The March 13 order is not a final divorce decree because it does not resolve the controversy between the parties or conclude the divorce litigation. See Salt Lake City v. Layton, 600 P.2d 538, 539-40 (Utah 1979) ("[A] judgment which disposes of fewer than all of the causes of action alleged in the plaintiff's complaint is not a final judgment from which an appeal may be taken.") (citing J.B. & R.E. Walker, Inc. v. Thayn, 17 Utah 2d 120, 405 P.2d 342, 343 (1965) (per curiam)). The trial court specifically reserved issues of custody, visitation, tax exemption and property distribution for future resolution. The other orders referenced by Mr. Olson are temporary orders pending entry of a final decree.
Second, even if the orders were final, Mr. Olson's notice of appeal is untimely. The attorney fees order was entered on March 26, 2001, but Mr. Olson did not file his notice of appeal until April 27, 2001, two days late. We lack jurisdiction to consider untimely appeals. See Utah R. App. P. 4(a) (requiring that a notice of appeal be filed with trial court within thirty days of date of entry of order sought to be appealed); Utah R. App. P. 2 (precluding appellate court from extending thirty day deadline for filing notice of appeal).
Because the orders Mr. Olson
seeks to appeal do not resolve the issues before the court and, because
even if they were final orders, his notice of appeal was late, we have
no alternative but to dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Pamela T. Greenwood,
Norman H. Jackson,
Associate Presiding Judge
James Z. Davis, Judge