Opinion
No. 59384.
10-12-2011
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC., a Maryland Corporation, Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF the STATE of Nevada, in and for the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Rob Bare, District Judge, Respondents, and First Transit, Inc., a Delaware Corporation; and Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, a Political Subdivision of the State of Nevada, Real Parties in Interest.
Kaempfer Crowell Renshaw Gronauer & Fiorentino Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial, LLC Lionel Sawyer & Collins/Las Vegas Zev E. Kaplan
Kaempfer Crowell Renshaw Gronauer & Fiorentino
Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial, LLC
Lionel Sawyer & Collins/Las Vegas
Zev E. Kaplan
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRITS OF CERTIORARI AND PROHIBITION
This original petition for writs of certiorari and prohibition challenges comments made by the respondent district court judge during a hearing.
Having reviewed the petition and appendix, we are not persuaded that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted at this time. NRAP 21(b)(1) ; Dangberg Holdings v. Douglas Co., 115 Nev. 129, 137–38, 978 P.2d 311, 316 (1999) ; Smith v. District Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). First, once the district court ruled that the matter was moot, and thus properly dismissed, it lacked jurisdiction to take any further action. SFPP, L.P. v. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. 608, 612, 173 P.3d 715, 718 (2007) (stating that the district court lacked jurisdiction, despite language in its order purporting to retain jurisdiction, to conduct further proceedings following entry of a final judgment absent a proper and timely motion for relief from the judgment). Second, no written order has been entered, and thus, this petition is premature. State, Div. Child & Fam. Servs. v. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 445, 451–52, 92 P.3d 1239, 1243–44 (2004) ; Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 689, 747 P.2d 1380, 1382 (1987). Finally, should the influence that petitioner fears from the district court's comments materialize at the Regional Transportation Commission's October 13, 2011, meeting, petitioner may seek appropriate relief in the district court or this court, and it thus has an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. NRS 34 .020(2); NRS 34.330 ; Pan v. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 88 P.3d 840 (2004).
Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.