Nationsbuilders Ins. Servs., Inc. v. Dist. Ct. (Sanchez) ( 2022 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
NATIONSBUILDERS INSURANCE No. 84227
SERVICES, INC., A FOREIGN
CORPORATION; AND NBIS
CONSTRUCTION & TRANSPORT
INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., A
FOREIGN CORPORATION,
Petitioners, FILED
vs.
THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT MAY 0 4 2022 .
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, ELIZABEM A. BROWN
CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF By
DEPUTY3I-
CLARK: AND THE HONORABLE
MARK R. DENTON, DISTRICT JUDGE,
Respondents,
and
DIANE SANCHEZ,
Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition
challenges a district court order denying reconsideration of petitioners'
motion to stay the underlying bad faith insurance action against them while
the personal injury action upon which the bad faith suit is based is decided
on appeal. Petitioners also filed an emergency motion seeking to stay the
district court proceedings pending our consideration of this petition, and on
February 14, 2022, we granted a temporary stay pending our receipt and
consideration of any opposition to the stay motion and further order of this
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(01 1947A .1ZZIO.
2.2- MR 04-1
court. Briefing on the stay motion has been completed, and real party in
interest has filed an answer to the writ petition.'
Having reviewed the petition, answer, and supporting
documents, we conclude that our extraordinary and discretionary
intervention in this matter is not warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial
Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Sniith v. Eighth
Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674. 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991).
In particular, petitioners have not demonstrated that the district court
manifestly abused its discretion or exceeded its jurisdiction in refusing to
stay the bad faith litigation while an appeal • from an order denying NRCP
60(b) relief from the default excess judgment remains pending. See, e.g.,
Romano v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa., 834 F.2d 968, 969-70 (11th Cir.
1987) (recognizing that a bad-faith insurance claim accrues when an excess
judgment against the insured becomes final); NRCP 60(c)(2) CThe motion
'Real party in interest's rnotion for an extension of time to file the
answer is granted; thus, the answer was timely filed on April 4, 2022.
Additionally, real party in interest has moved to de-designate as
confidential, or to file under seal, claims file notes, which are currently
deemed confidential pursuant to the parties stipulated protective order.
Petitioners oppose the motion, asserting that they are not the custodians of
those confidential records and that a sirnilar motion remains pending below.
'Ile motion to de-designate or file under seal is denied.
SUPREPAE COURT
OF
NEVADA
ICH 1947A .aailr.
2
[for NR.CP 60(b) relief] does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its
operation."). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DEN1ED.2
J.
Hardsty
Al4G4-0 J.
Stiglich
J.
Herndon
cc: Hon. Mark R. Denton, District Judge
Lipson Neilson P.C.
Prince Law Group
Eighth District Court Clerk
In light of this order, we deny the stay motion as moot and vacate
2
our February 14 temporary stay.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1,47A AI*
3
oar
5:3
.