Opinion
No. 72114
01-20-2017
KENNETH BERBERICH, TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF 4499 WEITZMAN PLACE TRUST, A NEVADA TRUST, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JOANNA KISHNER, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, A NEVADA NON-PROFIT COOPERATIVE CORPORATION; MTC FINANCIAL INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION REGISTERED IN NEVADA; OLYMPIA MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; FEDERAL HOME MORTGAGE CORPORATION, A FEDERALLY CHARTERED CORPORATION; AND CAM REAL ESTATE XIV, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Real Parties in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION
This is an original petition for writs of mandamus and prohibition challenging various district court orders and rulings entered in the underlying action.
Writs of mandamus and prohibition are extraordinary remedies, and whether a petition for such relief will be considered is solely within our discretion. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Nonetheless, neither a writ of mandamus nor a writ of prohibition will issue when the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330. And our supreme court has consistently recognized that an appeal generally constitutes an adequate and speedy remedy that precludes writ relief. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004).
Our review of the petition and the supporting documents demonstrates that the majority of the issues presented in this matter can be reviewed in the context of an appeal from the final judgment in the underlying case. And to the extent that an award of attorney fees is ultimately made through a post-judgment order, such a determination would be independently appealable as a special order after final judgment. See Winston Prods. Co. v. DeBoer, 122 Nev. 517, 525, 134 P.3d 726, 731 (2006). Given the procedural posture of the underlying case, we conclude that an appeal constitutes a speedy and adequate remedy that precludes our intervention by way of writ relief. See NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. Accordingly, we
In light of our resolution of this matter, we deny as moot petitioner's emergency motion for stay. --------
/s/_________, C.J.
Silver
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons cc: Hon. Joanna Kishner, District Judge
Brauer, Driscoll, Sun and Associates LLC
Aldridge Pite, LLP
Wolf, Rifkin, Shapiro, Schulman & Rabkin, LLP/Las Vegas
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Kemp, Jones & Coulthard, LLP
Eighth District Court Clerk