Opinion
84456
09-23-2022
MICHAEL MURRAY; AND MICHAEL RENO, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Petitioners, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE CARLI LYNN KIERNY, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and A CAB TAXI SERVICE LLC, A CAB SERIES LLC, F/K/A A CAB, LLC; AND CREIGHTON J. NADY, Real Parties in Interest.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
Prarraguirre, C.J.S.
This original petition for a writ of mandamus, in an action for unpaid wages, seeks a writ directing the district court to (1) terminate its order staying the enforcement of judgment pending resolution of the appeal in Murray v. Dubric, Docket No. 83492 (Order of Affirmance, August 11, 2022); (2) modify the final judgment as directed by this court's opinion in A Cab, LLC v. Murray, 137 Nev., Adv. Op. 84, 501 P.3d 961 (2021); (3) consider 1 on the merits petitioners' request for a receiver, as directed by this court in Murray v. A Cab Taxi Serv., LLC, Docket No. 82539, WL 2022 500818 (Nev. Feb. 17, 2022) (Order of Reversal and Remand); and (5) act promptly to enforce the final judgment.
Because this court entered an order of affirmance in Murray v. Dubric, Docket No. 83492, 2022 WL 3335982 (Nev. Aug. 11, 2022) (Order of Affirmance), we deny as moot petitioners' request for a writ directing the district court to lift the stay of enforcement pending resolution of that appeal.
Without expressing any opinion as to the merits of this writ petition, we deny it without prejudice to petitioner's right to appeal from any appealable orders or judgment.
Having reviewed the petition, answer, reply and accompanying appendices, we conclude that our extraordinary intervention is not warranted at this time. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Hardesty, J. Stiglich, J. Judges
Hon. Carli Lynn Kierny, District Judge
Hon. Maria Gall, District Judge 2