Opinion
87822-COA
08-02-2024
ROBERT R. PILKINGTON; AND DENISE L. PILKINGTON, Petitioners, v. THE HONORABLE STEVEN R. KOSACH; AND THE FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF NYE, Respondents, and HUNTER LIGGETT; JILL RENE STYNDA; JANET E. LENK COHEN; CARIN LENK SLOANE; KRISTIN NOEL LENK PFEIFER; AND GINGER STUMNE, Real Parties in Interest.
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND WRIT OF PROHIBITION
Petitioners Robert R. Pilkington and Denise L. Pilkington bring this original petition for mandamus and prohibition relief challenging district court orders declaring them vexatious litigants and imposing filing restrictions on them.
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. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 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. NRS 34.320; Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Mandamus and probation are extraordinary remedies, and it is within the discretion of this court to determine if a petition will be considered. Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.3d at 851. Petitioners bear the burden to show that extraordinary relief is warranted, and such relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004).
Based on our review of the documents before us, we conclude petitioners have not demonstrated that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. Id. at 224, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we deny the petition.
It is so ORDERED.
Gibbons C.J., Bulla J., Westbrook J.
Hon. Steven R. Kosach, Senior Judge