Opinion
No. 65341
05-14-2014
JESSICA BRUDJAR, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE SANDRA L. POMRENZE, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and NATHAN BRUDJAR, Real Party in Interest.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition seeking an order directing the district court to schedule an evidentiary hearing without delay in a divorce proceeding.
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). 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). It is within this court's sole discretion to determine if a writ petition will be considered. Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is not warranted. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; NRAP 21(b)(1). The district court has discretion to grant or deny continuances. See Bongiovi v. Sullivan, 122 Nev. 556, 570, 138 P.3d 433, 444 (2006). We note that the continuance here was not indefinite, but rather the district court set discovery deadlines for June 2014. Under these circumstances, we conclude that extraordinary writ relief is not warranted at this time. See Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
__________, J.
Hardesty
__________, J.
Douglas
__________, J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. Sandra L. Pomrenze, District Judge, Family Court Division
Michancy M. Cramer
Michael P. Rhodes
Eighth District Court Clerk