Opinion
No. 71753
11-23-2016
JON HEMMER, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; THE HONORABLE JOSEPH HARDY, JR., DISTRICT JUDGE; THE HONORABLE ELIZABETH GOFF GONZALEZ, DISTRICT JUDGE; AND THE HONORABLE SENIOR JUDGE NANCY A. BECKER, SETTLEMENT JUDGE, Respondents, and LAURIE BARGER, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION OR MANDAMUS
This is an original petition for a writ of prohibition or mandamus challenging a district court order setting a hearing for possible sanctions. Having considered the petition and appendix filed in this matter, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that the district court arbitrarily or capriciously exercised its discretion. Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). In particular, petitioner has represented that he will file a motion seeking similar relief in the district court, we generally decline to entertain petitions when the district court has yet to decide a particular issue, and we generally decline to interfere with the district court's control of its calendar. Helfstein v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 91, 362 P.3d 91, 94 (2015) ("Because an appeal is ordinarily an adequate remedy, this court generally declines to consider writ petitions challenging interlocutory district court orders."); Jones v. Nev. Comm'n on Jud. Discipline, 130 Nev. Adv. Op. 11, 318 P.3d 1078, 1084 (2014) (explaining that this court would not entertain a writ petition where issues may be addressed on appeal or following a lower tribunal's hearing and decision on the matter); Maheu v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 89 Nev. 214, 216-17, 510 P.2d 627, 629 (1973) (declining to "interfere with the trial court's calendaring of the pending motions" and explaining that the district courts have "broad discretion in calendaring matters"). Accordingly, our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted, see NRS 34.160; NRAP 21(b)(1); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991), and we
Pursuant to the supplement filed November 23, 2016, the Honorable Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez has been added as a respondent. The clerk shall conform the caption on this court's docket with the caption on this order.
Petitioner's emergency motion to stay the hearing set for November 28, 2016, is denied as moot.
/s/_________, C.J.
Parraguirre
/s/_________, J.
Hardesty cc: Hon. Joseph Hardy, Jr., District Judge
Hon. Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, District Judge
Hon. Nancy A. Becker, Settlement Judge
Benjamin B. Childs
Hatfield & Associates, Ltd.
Eighth District Court Clerk