Neff v. The First Jud. Dist. Ct. ( 2022 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
JOHN NEFF, No. 84109
Petitioner,
vs.
THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILED
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MAR 0 4 2022
CARSON CITY, ELIZABETH A. BROWN
CLERK9F §UPREPAE COURT
Respondent. BY 5 .‘t(
DEPUTYRK
ORDER DENYING PETITION
FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus seeks a writ
directing the district court to vacate its order denying a motion for default
judgment and striking entry of default—alleging that the attorney general
did not represent defendants at the time the complaint was served and
therefore service on the attorney general was not required.
Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that he lacks an adequate
legal remedy by way of appeal and that extraordinary relief is warranted,
and we therefore decline to exercise our discretion to entertain this petition.
NRS 34.170; Cote H. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 36, 39, 175
P.3d 906, 908 (2008) ([N] either a writ of prohibition nor a writ of
mandamus is appropriate if the petitioner has a plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law." (internal quotation marks omitted));
Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844
(2004) (Petitioners carry the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary
relief is warranted."); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674,
SUPREME COURT
OP
NEVADA
1; -0701 1
677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (providing that writ relief is purely
discretionary). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
o
Parraguirre
J.
Hardesty
A-c,fht.,0 J.
Stiglich
cc: John Neff
Carson City Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A .4.00.
2