Tahiti Village Master Ass'n v. Dist. Ct. (M&h Enterprises, Inc.) ( 2015 )

 committed such an error amounting to a manifest abuse of discretion that
would merit extraordinary writ relief in dismissing Tahiti Village's
constructional defect claim but allowing it to proceed with its remaining
claims. We the People Nev. ex rel. Angle v. Miller, 124 Nev. 874, 879-80,
192 P.3d 1166, 1170 (2008) (party seeking writ relief carries the burden to
show that the district court committed such a manifest abuse of discretion
that would warrant this court's extraordinary and discretionary
intervention); D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev.
468, 475, 168 P.3d 731, 737 (2007) (writ of mandamus may be available to
compel the performance of an act required by law or to control a manifest
abuse or arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion).
For these reasons, we decline to exercise our discretion in
favor of entertaining this petition for extraordinary writ relief. See Smith
v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851(1991)
(decision to issue writ relief lies within the discretion of this court).
Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
, C.J .
Hardesty
Douglas
, J.
Saitta
Gibbons
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A e
cc: Hon. Susan Johnson, District Judge
Hutchison & Steffen, LLC
Anna T. Amundson
Schwartz Flansburg PLLC
Marquis Aurbach Coffing
Lincoln, Gustafson & Cercos
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEvADA
3
r,O1 1 ,147A es,