Knight v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

Full title: SAMIRA C. KNIGHT, AN INDIVIDUAL, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL…

Court: COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Dec 14, 2017

No. 73726 (Nev. App. Dec. 14, 2017)

Opinion

No. 73726

12-14-2017

SAMIRA C. KNIGHT, AN INDIVIDUAL, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JENNIFER ELLIOTT, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and PAMELA BENFORD, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND VASSAL BENFORD, AN INDIVIDUAL, Real Parties in Interest.

Silver

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging a district court oral ruling requiring petitioner to cooperate in a receiver's investigation and challenging the district court's authority to decide a motion to set aside a prior order and disgorge attorney fees.

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). This court has discretion as to whether to entertain a petition for extraordinary relief and will not do so when the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. 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). 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, 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.

It is so ORDERED.¹

1 The Honorable Jerome T. Tao, Judge, voluntarily recused himself from participation in the decision of this matter. --------

/s/_________, C.J.

Silver

/s/_________, J.

Gibbons cc: Hon. Jennifer Elliott, District Judge, Family Court Division

Hafter Law

Hofland & Tomsheck

Kainen Law Group

Eighth District Court Clerk