Opinion
83157
02-21-2022
MANUEL IGLESIAS; AND EDWARD MOFFLY, Petitioners, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE NANCY L. ALLF, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and N5HYG, LLC; AND NEVADA 5, INC., Real Parties in Interest.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is an original petition for a writ of prohibition, or in the alternative, a writ of mandamus, challenging a district court order denying a motion for partial judgment on the pleadings.
Having considered the petition and its supporting documentation, as well as the answer and reply, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Direct Grading & Paving, LLC v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 137 Nev., Adv. Op. 31, 491 P.3d 13, 17 (2021) (stating that the decision to entertain a writ petition is solely within our discretion); Archon Corp. v. Eighth Judicial Dist Court, 133 Nev. 816, 821, 407 P, 3d 702, 707 (2017) (stating that the petitioner bears the burden of showing that writ relief is warranted). Among other reasons, petitioners have not shown that an appeal from a final judgment would be an inadequate legal remedy. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004) (observing "that the right to appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy that precludes writ relief); see also Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev., Adv. Op. 80, 476 P.3d 1194, 1198 (2020) ("A remedy does not fail to be speedy and adequate, because, by pursuing it through the ordinary course of law, more time probably would be consumed than in a mandamus proceeding."). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Hardesty, Stiglich, Herndon, J.
Hon. Nancy L. Allf, District Judge, Hon. Linda M. Bell, Chief Judge.