Court Opinion

ID: 9617674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:59:34.709516+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:14.265992
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing and Motion to Amend and Modify Judgment
*149OPINION

Per Curiam:

A petition for rehearing and a motion to amend judgment was filed herein on behalf of Savina Sala, one of the defaulting defendants below who is not a party to this appeal.
The petition prays that the judgment be revised and modified so as to reverse the judgment not only as to the appealing defendants but also as to Savina Sala “and all other defaulting and non-appealing defendants as to any portion of the ‘right of way’ descending from Thomas Hayden and wife, A. J. Hatch and wife, M. C. Lake, and George Deremer.”
Petitioner contends that the trial court’s judgment was joint as to all defendants including the defendants in default, and that a reversal on the appeal by certain of those defendants who appeared below, inures to the benefit of all defendants. She adds that the judgment of reversal inures to her benefit without any specific declaration by this court.
Respondent has moved to strike this petition for rehearing and to deny said motion to amend upon the ground that petitioner is not a party appellant and as such has no standing before this court.
In determining the appeal in this case the court considered the pleadings, the evidence, and the stipulations *150of the appellants and respondent. None of these parties has requested a rehearing or an amendment of the judgment. The successful appellants are therefore entitled to have issued a remittitur to the court below upon the expiration of fifteen days without further delay in the enjoyment of their adjudicated rights.
The matters presented by petitioner herein are not within the scope of a petition for rehearing as contemplated by Rule XV of Rules of the Supreme Court and as pointed out in the case of Gershenhorn v. Stutz on Petition for Rehearing, 72 Nev. 312, 306 P.2d 121. Furthermore, petitioner, not being a party to the appeal, is under the circumstances precluded from moving to amend the judgment.
Respondent’s motion to strike the petition for rehearing is granted, and petitioner’s motion to amend is denied.