Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Nevada Appeal Court

Court

Nevada Appeal Court

Nevada

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2022-01-24
Status Case Closed
Type Civil Appeal General Proper Person
Docket 85 entries
Disposition we dismiss the appeal

Docket Entries

  1. Transferred from Supreme Court. (COA).
  2. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Second Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). Relief is requested by December 7, 2020. (TRANSFERRED FROM THE SUPREME COURT PER 12/07/20 NOTICE). (COA).
  3. Filed Order Directing Expedited Response. Having reviewed the motion, it appears that an expedited response will assist this court in its resolution. Respondents shall have until 1:30 p.m. tomorrow, December 8, 2020, to file and serve their response to the motion. fn1 [all documents shall be filed personally or by facsimile or electric transmission with the clerk of this court in Carson City.] (COA)
  4. Filed Respondents' Expedited Response to Second Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). (COA)
  5. Filed Respondents' Expedited Response to Second Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). (COA)
  6. Filed Appellant's Expedited Reply to His Second Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). Faxed Copy (COA)
  7. Filed Order Granting Limited Stay. Appellant has moved for an emergency stay, pending appeal, of the portion of the district court's order prohibiting him from communicating with the IRS relative to the tax return he filed on the estate's behalf. Appellant seeks to respond to an IRS notice of levy concerning this return. Having reviewed the motion in light of the NRAP 8(c) factors, we grant the motion in part and stay the portion of the district court's order prohibiting communications with the IRS as outlined below, pending further proceedings in the district court on the stay motion filed in that court. Appellant shall be able to contact the IRS in response to the notice of levy he received concerning the estate tax return he filed to inform the IRS of the district court's April 6, 2020, order and this appeal, and to seek appropriate relief, such as placing the IRS matter on hold. Appellant shall promptly inform respondents of his communications and any response thereto. This stay will be automatically vacated once the district court resolves the motion for stay currently pending in that court. (COA)
  8. Filed Appellant's Expedited Reply to His Second Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). Original Copy. (COA)
  9. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Procedural Motion for Extension of Filing Deadline for Appellant's Opening Brief. (COA)
  10. Filed Notice of Appearance (Alan J. Lefebvre and William D. Schuller of Litigator Law hereby enter their notice of appearance on behalf of interested party Steven Jares, Co-Special Administrator). (COA)
  11. Filed Order Granting Motion. Appellant shall have until March 18, 2021, to file and serve the opening brief. (COA)
  12. Filed Interested Party Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss. (STRICKEN PER ORDER 01/07/2021). (COA)
  13. Filed Order Granting Telephonic Extension. Respondents shall have until January 14, 2021, to file and serve a joinder to the motion to dismiss filed on December 24, 2020. (SC)
  14. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Procedural Motion to Have Clerk of Court of Appeals Place in the Public Appeal Record, Two Pages form Two Sealed District Court Documents Filed on March 11, 2020, as Found in the Sealed Record on Appeal Volume 2. (COA)
  15. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Opposition to the December 24, 2020 Motion of Interested Party Steven Jares to Dismiss the Appeal. (COA)
  16. Filed Order Granting Extension Per Telephonic Request. William D. Schuller's reply in support of the motion to dismiss appeal filed on December 24, 2020 due: January 20, 2021. (COA)
  17. Filed Order. Alan J. Lefebvre and William D. Schuller of Litigator Law have filed a notice of appearance on behalf of "interested party" Steven Jares. As Mr. Jares is not a party to this appeal, the notice of appearance is disapproved. The clerk shall strike the motion to dismiss filed by Mr. Jares on December 24, 2020. Mr. Jares may file a motion to substitute, or a motion to add himself as a respondent, within 14 days of the date of this order, if deemed warranted fn1[On December 29, 2020, this court granted respondents an extension of time to file a joinder to the motion to dismiss. Given this order, a joinder may no longer be appropriate. Further, on January 4, 2021, this court granted Jares an extension of time to file a reply in support of the motion to dismiss. Given this order, the reply is no longer necessary.] (COA)
  18. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Motion to Supplement the Record. (COA)
  19. Filed Motion to Add Steven Jares as a Respondent, or in the Alternative, Motion to Substitute Steven Jares for Respondent Daniel M. Davies. (COA)
  20. Filed Order Granting Extension Per Telephonic Request. Appellant's response to the motion filed in this court on January 11, 2011 due: February 2, 2021. (COA)
  21. Filed Order. The clerk shall provide appellant with a copy of pages 248 and 265 of the sealed record on appeal filed in the Supreme Court on August 28, 2020. Appellant has filed an unopposed pro se motion to supplement the record on appeal. The motion is denied. (COA)
  22. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's opposition to the January 11, 2021 motion to add Steven Jares as a respondent or in the alternative, motion to substitute Steven Jares for Respondent Daniel M. Davies. (COA)
  23. Filed Reply in Support of Motion to Add Steven Jares as a Respondent, or in the Alternative, Motion to Substitute Steven Jares for Respondent Daniel M. Davies. (COA)
  24. Filed Notice from Court Reporter. Quentin Mansfield stating that the requested transcripts were delivered. Dates of transcripts: 02/26/21. (COA)
  25. Filed Notice from Court Reporter. Maria Balagtas stating that the requested transcripts were delivered. Dates of transcripts: March 5, 2021. (SC)
  26. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Opening Brief. (SC) (STRICKEN PER 04/09/21 ORDER).
  27. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's procedural motion under NRAP 27 to file an Amended Opening Brief. (COA)
  28. Filed Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File an Amended Opening Brief (REJECTED PER NOTICE ISSUED 05/06/21). (COA)
  29. Issued Notice Of Rejection - No Notice Of Appearance (Edgar C. Smith). (COA)
  30. Issued Notice of Rejection of Filed Document. Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File an Amended Opening Brief. (COA)
  31. Filed Notice of Appearance (Edgar C. Smith of the law firm Clear Counsel Law Group hereby enters his appearance as counsel for Richard J. Bach, Co-Special Administrator of the Estate of Sun Myung Moon, Deceased). (COA)
  32. Filed Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File an Amended Opening Brief (REJECTED PER NOTICE ISSUED 04/07/21). (COA)
  33. Issued Notice to Provide Proof of Service. Due date: 10 days. Notice of Appearance (Edgar C. Smith). (COA)
  34. Filed Proof of Service (REJECTED PER NOTICE ISSUED 04/07/21). (COA)
  35. Issued Notice of Rejection of Filed Document. Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File An Amended Opening Brief. (COA)
  36. Issued Notice of Rejection of Filed Document (Proof of Service). (COA)
  37. Filed Notice of Appearance (Edgar C. Smith of the law firm Clear Counsel Law Group hereby enters his appearance as counsel for Richard J. Bach, Co-Special Administrator of the Estate of Sun Myung Moon, Deceased). (COA)
  38. Filed Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File an Amended Opening Brief (REJECTED PER NOTICE ISSUED 04/08/21). (COA)
  39. Issued Notice of Rejection of Filed Document. Respondent Richard Bach's Opposition to Steinbronn's Motion to File an Amended Opening Brief. (COA)
  40. Filed Order. Steven Jares has filed a motion to add himself as a respondent to this appeal or, alternatively, substitute himself in place of respondent Daniel M. Davies. The motion is granted to the following extent. The clerk shall add Steven Jares, Co-Special Administrator of the Estate, as a respondent to this appeal. The clerk shall add Alan J. Lefebvre and William D. Schuller of Litigator Law as counsel of record for Jares. This court declines to remove Davies as a respondent at this time. To the extent appellant seeks to disqualify Jares' counsel, this court declines to do so at this time because appellant fails to demonstrate that he has standing to move to disqualify Jares' counsel. Appellant's unopposed motion for leave to file an amended opening brief is granted. The clerk shall strike the opening brief filed on March 24, 2021, and file the amended opening brief received on March 24, 2021. Respondents shall have 30 days from the date of this order to file and serve their answering briefs. Appellant shall have 30 days from service of the last-filed answering brief to file and serve any reply brief. fn2 [It is not clear if appellant opposes the addition of Jares as a respondent as he states both that he opposes the addition and that Jares can be added as a respondent, if appropriate.] (COA).
  41. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Amended Opening Brief. (COA).
  42. Filed Respondent Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss. (COA)
  43. Issued Notice to Provide Proof of Service. Due date: 10 days. Respondent Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss. (COA)
  44. Filed Proof of Service (Respondent Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss). (COA)
  45. Filed Respondent Richard Bach's Joinder to Respondent Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss the Steinbronn Appeal. (COA)
  46. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Opposition to the April 14, 2020, Motion of Respondent Steven Jares to Dismiss this Appeal. (SC)
  47. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Opposition to the April 16, 2021, Joinder of Respondent Richard J. Back to the April 14, 2021, Motion of Respondent Steven Jares to Dismiss the Appeal. (SC)
  48. Filed Reply in Support of Respondent Steven Jares' Motion to Dismiss. (COA)
  49. Filed Order Granting Telephonic Extension. Respondent Richard Bach's Answering Brief due: May 24, 2021. (SC)
  50. Filed Order Granting Extension Per Telephonic Request. Respondent Steven Jares' answering brief due: May 24, 2021. (COA)
  51. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Alternate Motions Under NRAP 27. (COA)
  52. Filed Respondent Steven Jares' Opposition to Appellant Steinbronn's Alternate Motions Under NRAP 27. (COA)
  53. Filed Richard Bach's Joinder to Steven Jares' Opposition to Appellant Steinbronn's Alternate Motions Under NRAP 27. (COA)
  54. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent Jares' May 7, 2021 Opposition to Appellant Steinbronn's Alternative Motions under NRAP 27. (COA)
  55. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Errata to Steinbronn's Reply dated May 10, 2021. (COA)
  56. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Reply to Respondent Bach's May 11, 2020 Joinder to Respondent Jares' May 7, 2021 Opposition to Appellant Steinbronn's Alternative Motions Under NRAP 27 dated May 2, 2021, file stamped May 4, 2021. (COA)
  57. Filed Order. Respondent Steven Jares has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. Appellant's countermotion to strike the motion to dismiss and joinder as untimely under NRAP 14(f) is denied as that rule does not place a time limitation on filing a motion to dismiss. Appellant's motion to strike Jares's reply in support of the motion to dismiss, or for alternative relief, is also denied. Insofar as the motion to dismiss asserts that the challenged order is not substantively appealable, it appears the motion is best considered at the time of disposition of this appeal. Respondents shall have 21 days from the date of this order to file and serve the answering briefs. (SC)
  58. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). Relief requested by June 2, 2021. (COA)
  59. Filed Respondent Steven Jares' Opposition to [Third] Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). (COA)
  60. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Reply to Respondent Jares' May 27, 2021 Opposition to Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). (Filed via Fax.) (SC)
  61. Filed Respondent Richard J. Bach's Joinder to Respondent Steven Jares' Opposition to [Third] Emergency Motion for Relief Under 27(e). (COA)
  62. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent Richard J. Bach's June 1, 2021 Joinder to Respondent Jares' May 27, 2021 Opposition to Appellant's Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e) that was served May 25 and filed on May 26, 2021. (Via FAX). (COA)
  63. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent Jares' May 27, 2021 Opposition to Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e). (COA)
  64. Filed Order Denying Stay. Steinbronn has filed an emergency motion seeking to stay the portion of the appealed order that prohibits him from communicating with the IRS on an estate tax return he filed on behalf of the subject estate. We deny Steinbronn's emergency motion for a stay. (COA).
  65. Filed Respondent Steven Jares' Answering Brief. (COA)
  66. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent Richard J. Bach's June 1, 2021 Joinder to Respondent Jares' May 27, 2021 Opposition to Appellant's Emergency Motion for Relief Under NRAP 27(e) that was served May 25 and Filed on May 26, 2021. (COA)
  67. Filed Respondent Richard J. Bach's Answering Brief (REJECTED PER NOTICE ISSUED 06/11/21). (COA)
  68. Issued Notice of Rejection of Deficient Brief. Corrected brief due: 5 days. (COA)
  69. Filed Respondent Richard J. Bach's Amended Answering Brief. (COA)
  70. Filed Order Granting Telephonic Extension. Appellant's Reply Brief due: July 26, 2021. (SC)
  71. Filed Proper Person Appellant's Motion to Extend Time for Reply Brief. (COA)
  72. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Request for Judicial Notice. (COA)
  73. Filed Respondent Steven Jares' Request for Judicial Notice. (COA)
  74. Filed Respondent Steven Jares Opposition to Motion to Extend Time for Appellant's Reply Brief. (COA)
  75. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent' Jares' Opposition to Motion to Extend Time for Appellant's Reply Brief and Appellant's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Reply Brief. (COA)
  76. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Response to Respondent Jares' July 26, 2021 Request for Judicial Notice. (COA)
  77. Filed Respondent's Response to Motion Opposition to Appellant's Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Reply Brief. (COA)
  78. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply to Respondent Jares' August 6, 2021 Opposition to Appellant's Motion for Leave to File Supplementary Reply Brief. (COA)
  79. Filed Order. The motions for judicial notice are granted to the following extent. This court will provisionally take judicial notice of the Petition for First and Final Accounting and Order of Final Discharge filed in the district court on July 8, 2021, and the documents attached to Jares' July 26, 2021, motion for judicial notice. However, if it is determined at the time of disposition of this appeal that these documents are not appropriate for consideration on appeal, this court will disregard them. To the extent appellant asks that this court take judicial notice of documents filed in this court, the motion is unnecessary. Appellant may cite to documents filed in this court without judicial notice. The clerk shall return the reply brief received on July 29, 2021, unfiled. Appellant shall have 14 days from the date of this order to file and serve a reply brief that does not exceed 15 pages or 7,000 words. (SC)
  80. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's September 2, 2021 Request for Judicial Notice. (COA)
  81. Filed Proper Person Appellant Steinbronn's Reply Brief to Respondent Bach's Answering Brief and to Respondent Jares' Answering Brief. (COA)
  82. Briefing Completed/To Screening. (COA)
  83. Filed Order. Appellant has filed an unopposed pro se motion for judicial notice. The motion is granted to the following extent. This court will provisionally take judicial notice of the document attached to appellant's September 8, 2021, motion. However, if it is determined at the time of disposition of this appeal that this document is not appropriate for consideration on appeal, this court will disregard it. (COA)
  84. Filed Order Affirming in Part and Dismissing in Part. "We affirm the district court's order to the extent it denied Steinbronn's request for over $10,000 in expenses related to the 2019 tax return, and we dismiss the appeal insofar as it challenges the remainder of the order." Court of Appeals-MG/JT/BB (COA)
  85. Transferred to Supreme Court. (COA)

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more