Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.

Nevada Supreme Court

Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.

DecidedMarch 19, 2013

Docket61379

StatusUnpublished

This text of Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct. (Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct.) 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

Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct., (Neb. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

failed to file his civil complaint, and to the extent that petitioner's claim is true, we remind the district court clerk of its duty to file documents and keep an accurate record of the proceedings before the court. See Donoho v. District Court, 108 Nev. 1027, 1029-30, 842 P.2d 731, 733 (1992) (explaining that the clerk of the district court has a duty to file documents and to keep an accurate record of the proceedings before the court). Nevertheless, we trust that the clerk will heed this reminder and perform its duty, and that the district court will resolve the matters pending before it as promptly as its calendar permits. Thus, we conclude that our intervention is not warranted in this matter. See Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.'

'We direct the clerk of this court to file the motion to proceed in forma pauperis provisionally received on August 17, 2012. As the filing fee was waived in this proceeding, we take no further action with regard to this motion. We also direct the clerk of this court to file the letters provisionally received on August 9, 2012, and November 13, 2012. We conclude that no action needs to be taken on these documents.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 2 cc: Anthony D. Bailey Attorney General/Carson City

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

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

failed to file his civil complaint, and to the extent that petitioner's claim is true, we remind the district court clerk of its duty to file documents and keep an accurate record of the proceedings before the court. See Donoho v. District Court, 108 Nev. 1027, 1029-30, 842 P.2d 731, 733 (1992) (explaining that the clerk of the district court has a duty to file documents and to keep an accurate record of the proceedings before the court). Nevertheless, we trust that the clerk will heed this reminder and perform its duty, and that the district court will resolve the matters pending before it as promptly as its calendar permits. Thus, we conclude that our intervention is not warranted in this matter. See Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.'

'We direct the clerk of this court to file the motion to proceed in forma pauperis provisionally received on August 17, 2012. As the filing fee was waived in this proceeding, we take no further action with regard to this motion. We also direct the clerk of this court to file the letters provisionally received on August 9, 2012, and November 13, 2012. We conclude that no action needs to be taken on these documents.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) 1947A 2 cc: Anthony D. Bailey Attorney General/Carson City

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bailey v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-eighth-judicial-dist-ct-nev-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack