Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter)

Nevada Supreme Court

Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter)

DecidedApril 12, 2018

Docket75335

StatusUnpublished

This text of Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter) (Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter), (Neb. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SYED AKBARULLAH, M.D.; AND No. 75335 BRIAN LIPMAN, M.D., Petitioners, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, APR 12 2018 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE DAVID M. JONES, DISTRICT JUDGE, F BRZIAT Respondents, and WILLIAM NATHAN BAXTER, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a summary judgment motion in a tort action. Having considered petitioners' arguments and the supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. NRS 34.160; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d. 849, 851 (1991). In particular, we perceive no reason to deviate from our general policy of declining to consider writ petitions challenging orders denying motions for summary judgment, see Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997), as the underlying action has been pending since 2013 in district court and has a trial setting for early next month, and it appears that the SUPREME COURT OF legal issues raised in the petition may be refined during further pretrial NEVADA

(0) 1947A 4"5,- ;•''

I proceedings or at trial and that those issues may be adequately reviewed on an appeal from a final judgment, see Pan, 120 Nev. 222, at 224 88 P.3d 840, 841. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

' Adeutuf , J. / Pickering Hardesty

cc: Hon. David M. Jones, District Judge Carroll, Kelly, Trotter, Franzen, McKenna & Peabody Naylor & Braster Kenneth M. Sigelman & Associates Christiansen Law Offices Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A e

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SYED AKBARULLAH, M.D.; AND No. 75335 BRIAN LIPMAN, M.D., Petitioners, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, APR 12 2018 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE DAVID M. JONES, DISTRICT JUDGE, F BRZIAT Respondents, and WILLIAM NATHAN BAXTER, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a summary judgment motion in a tort action. Having considered petitioners' arguments and the supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. NRS 34.160; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d. 849, 851 (1991). In particular, we perceive no reason to deviate from our general policy of declining to consider writ petitions challenging orders denying motions for summary judgment, see Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997), as the underlying action has been pending since 2013 in district court and has a trial setting for early next month, and it appears that the SUPREME COURT OF legal issues raised in the petition may be refined during further pretrial NEVADA

(0) 1947A 4"5,- ;•''

I proceedings or at trial and that those issues may be adequately reviewed on an appeal from a final judgment, see Pan, 120 Nev. 222, at 224 88 P.3d 840, 841. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

' Adeutuf , J. / Pickering Hardesty

cc: Hon. David M. Jones, District Judge Carroll, Kelly, Trotter, Franzen, McKenna & Peabody Naylor & Braster Kenneth M. Sigelman & Associates Christiansen Law Offices Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A e

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Akbarullah, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akbarullah-md-v-dist-ct-baxter-nev-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack