Opinion
No. 72344
03-31-2017
UNION CAB, LLC; AND SUSAN M. TACKEL, Petitioners, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE RICHARD SCOTTI, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and DEBORAH A. ORDAZ, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging various pre-trial district court orders entered in the underlying torts action.
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). Writ relief is typically not available, however, when the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. See NRS 34.170; Int'l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558. Generally, an appeal is an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. Int'l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558. Whether to consider a writ petition is within this court's discretion. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). And petitioners bear 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 supporting documents, we conclude that petitioners have failed to meet their burden of demonstrating that extraordinary writ relief is warranted. See id. Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1); see also Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851.
In light of our resolution of this matter, we deny as moot petitioners' motion for stay. --------
/s/_________, C.J.
Silver
/s/_________, J.
Tao
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons cc: Hon. Richard Scotti, District Judge
Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP/Las Vegas
Eglet Prince
Eighth District Court Clerk