Morabito v. Dist. Ct. (Jh, Inc.) ( 2014 )

 compelling his attendance at a deposition in Nevada because real parties
in interest improperly filed the underlying confession of judgment with the
same district court case number as a previous district court action that
was dismissed on the parties' stipulation, making the order compelling
petitioner's deposition in the confessed judgment proceeding void.
Having considered the petition, answer, reply, and the
appendices, we conclude that our extraordinary intervention is not
warranted at this time. Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. In
particular, petitioner did not provide this court with a copy of a written
order memorializing the district court's ruling that petitioner appear in
Washoe County for a deposition, see Rust v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist., 103
Nev. 686, 688-89, 747 P.2d 1380, 1382 (1987) (recognizing that an oral
ruling is ineffective for any purpose), and we are not otherwise convinced
that petitioner's argument regarding the district court's jurisdiction over
the confession of judgment proceedings warrants our extraordinary
intervention, at least at this point in the proceedings. See Pan, 120 Nev.
at 228, 88 P.3d at 844; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Thus,
under these circumstances, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.'
,
Pickering
J.
Parraguirre
'In light of our resolution of this matter, we vacate the temporary
stay imposed by our April 4, 2014, order.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge
Robison Belaustegui Sharp & Low
Gordon Silver/Reno
Washoe District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A