Opinion
No. 81275
07-16-2020
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order granting and denying motions for partial summary judgment in an inverse condemnation action.
Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997) (observing that this court generally will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying summary judgment). In particular, petitioner has an adequate remedy in the form of an appeal from any adverse final judgment. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. We therefore
In light of this disposition, we deny as moot petitioner's July 2, 2020, stay motion. --------
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons /s/_________, J.
Stiglich /s/_________, J.
Silver cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge
Attorney General/Carson City
Attorney General/Transportation Division/Las Vegas
Law Offices of Brian C. Padgett
Leach Kern Gruchow Anderson Song/Las Vegas
Eighth District Court Clerk