ruling on a trial de novo request for an abuse of discretion. Casino
Properties, Inc. v. Andrews, 112 Nev. 132, 135-36, 911 P.2d 1181, 1183
(1996). Having reviewed the briefs and appendices on appeal, we conclude
that the district court incorrectly dismissed appellant's trial de novo
request based on the failure to pay the jury fees. NSTR 4(a)(1) requires
the payment of "applicable juror fees." As argued by appellant, he did not
seek a jury trial in his request for a trial de novo. Respondent likewise did
not file a demand for a jury trial. Therefore, no jury fees were necessary
in this proceeding. As there were no "applicable juror fees," appellant was
under no obligation to pay for unnecessary jury fees. The same outcome
results under the requirements of NSTR 31(b)(1). Accordingly, the district
court abused its discretion in dismissing the request for a trial de novo
and we
ORDER the judgment of the district court VACATED and we
REVERSE AND REMAND this matter to the district court for proceedings
consistent with this order.
J.
Saitta
cc: Hon. Connie J. Steinheimer, District Judge
Hon. Janet J. Berry, District Judge
Donald D. Beury
Jazz Aldrich
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A '