Davis v. State ( 2015 )

 16.1 or otherwise argued that he attempted to advance his case against
the remaining defendant, we conclude that the district court was within
its discretion when it dismissed the remaining defendant based on
appellant's failure to hold the NRCP 16.1 case conference. See Arnold v.
Kip, 123 Nev. 410, 414, 168 P.3d 1050, 1052 (2007) (reviewing a district
court's decision to grant a motion to dismiss under NRCP 16.1(e) for an
abuse of discretion); see also NRCP 16.1(g) (specifying that pro se plaintiffs
are not excused from holding a case conference). We therefore
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
J.
, J.
Gibbons
J.
Pickering
cc: Hon. Michael Montero, District Judge
James Anthony Davis
Attorney General/Carson City
Pershing County Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A