Opinion
No. 79212-COA
09-11-2019
ANGEL AJOLO, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY C. WILLIAMS, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and SELENA LEAGUE, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion to strike a request for trial de novo following court annexed arbitration.
A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). A writ of mandamus will not issue, however, if the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. See NRS 34.170; Int'l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558. Further, mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, and it is within the discretion of this court to determine if a petition will be considered. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having considered the documents before us, we conclude that petitioner has failed to demonstrate that extraordinary writ relief is warranted. See id. Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1); Smith, 107 Nev, at 677, 818 P.2d at 851.
In light of this order, we deny as moot petitioner's motion for a stay of the district court proceedings. --------
It is so ORDERED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Bulla cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge
Resnick & Louis, P.C./Las Vegas
Bowen Law Offices
Eighth District Court Clerk