Tate, Jr., M.D. (James) v. Dist. Ct. (State Bd. of Medical Exam'r.) ( 2014 )

 judicial functions when such proceedings are in excess of the district
court's jurisdiction. See NRS 34.320; Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court,
107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849,851 (1991). It is within this court's sole
discretion to determine if a writ petition will be considered. Smith, 107
Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Petitioner bears the burden of
demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth
Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). An
appeal is typically an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. Id. at
224, 88 P.3d at 841.
Having considered the petition, answer, and reply, 2 we
conclude that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is not
warranted because petitioner has an adequate legal remedy in the form of
an appeal from any adverse judgment. See NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Pan,
120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. An order denying a motion for an
injunction is appealable. 3 See NRAP 3A(b)(3) (allowing an appeal from an
order denying an injunction); Ellis v. McDaniel, 95 Nev. 455, 457, 596 P.2d
222, 223 (1979). Accordingly, as petitioner has a speedy and adequate
2 0nApril 18, 2014, petitioner filed a motion for leave to file a
limited reply to real party in interest's answer to the petition. Having
considered the motion, we grant it and direct the clerk of this court to
detach and file the reply, which was attached to the April 18 motion.
3 Petitioneracknowledges in his petition that a district court's denial
of injunctive relief is reviewed on direct appeal. Petitioner asserts that the
time constraints in this matter warrant expedited consideration. In cases
in which parties file a direct appeal and seek emergency relief, this court
reviews any properly made requests under the established procedures
provided by the appellate rules. See NRAP 8.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
remedy available in the form of an appeal, we deny the petition. See Pan,
120 Nev. at 224-25, 88 P.3d at 841; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at
851.
It is so ORDERED.
/A6--txt-g-tn
ibr
ev4-"pts-ram7
Parraguirre
J.
Cherry
J.
Saitta
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(0) 1947A
PICKERING, J., concurring:
I concur in the result only.
Pickering
cc: Hon. James M. Bixler, District Judge
Hafter Law
Bradley 0. Van Ry
Eighth District Court Clerk
4