Opinion
No. 72343
03-13-2017
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION
This is an original petition for a writ of prohibition challenging the district court's decision to voluntarily recuse itself from the underlying action.
This court may issue a writ of prohibition to arrest the proceedings of a district court exercising its judicial functions when such proceedings are in excess of the district court's jurisdiction. See NRS 34.320; Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). In particular, a writ of prohibition is an appropriate avenue to challenge a district court's voluntary recusal from a case. See Ham v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 93 Nev. 409, 412, 566 P.2d 420, 422 (1977). Nevertheless, it is petitioner's burden to demonstrate 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 petition and appendix, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that our intervention by way of extraordinary writ relief is warranted in this matter. See Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851 (explaining that whether to consider a writ petition is a matter within this court's discretion). Unlike in Ham, the district court's decision to voluntarily recuse itself from the underlying action was based on "reasons which reasonably appear to be judicially warranted." 93 Nev. at 415, 566 P.2d at 424. Moreover, we have reviewed the other authority presented by petitioner and conclude that it does not demonstrate that voluntary recusal was prohibited in this matter. Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1).
It is so ORDERED.
/s/_________, C.J.
Silver
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons cc: Hon. David M. Jones, District Judge
Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP/Las Vegas
Maier Gutierrez Ayon, PLLC
Eighth District Court Clerk