Opinion
No. 72482
12-28-2017
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF
This is an original pro se petition for extraordinary writ relief challenging a district court order awarding attorney fees as a contempt penalty.
This court has discretion as to whether to entertain a petition for extraordinary relief. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007); cf. NRAP 21(c). 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 petition and the record, 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); D.R. Horton, 123 Nev. at 475, 168 P.3d at 737.
In light of this order, we deny as moot all other requests for relief currently pending in this matter.
The Honorable Jerome Tao, Judge, voluntarily recused himself from participation in the decision of this matter. --------
/s/_________, C.J.
Silver
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons cc: Hon. Cynthia Lu, District Judge, Family Court Division
Lee David Hustead
Surratt Law Practice, PC/Reno
Washoe District Court Clerk