Bank v. Goodman

Nevada Supreme Court

Bank v. Goodman

DecidedApril 6, 2022

Docket84497

StatusPublished

This text of Bank v. Goodman (Bank v. Goodman) 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

Bank v. Goodman, (Neb. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

STEVEN J. BANK, EX REL. EFREN No. 84497 GONZALEZ-RIVERA, Petitioner, vs. FIL MAYOR CAROLYN GOODMAN; AND CITY OF LAS VEGAS CITY COUNCIL, APR 0 6 2022 Res • ondents. ELIZAETTH A. BROWN CLERK a F SUPREME COURT BY OE

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDA.MUS OR PROHIBITION

This is an emergency, pro se, original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition seeking to preclude the City Council from considering and/or approving a rezoning request.' Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See 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, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Generally, challenges to final administrative zoning decisions must be made in the district court in the first instance. See Kay v. Nunez, 122 Nev. 1100, 1105, 146 P.3d 801, 805 (2006); Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 604, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). Further, non- attorneys may not represent another person's interests before this court,

'Although petitioner's affidavit was not notarized, it appears that he otherwise meets the NRAP 24 requirements, and we therefore grant his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and waive the filing fee. NRAP 21(e).

SUPREME COUFIT OF NEVADA

lOp 1947A 01.3- )07150 Guerin v. Guerin, 116 Nev. 210, 214, 993 P.2d 1256, 1258 (2000), and writ petitions must name and be served on all real parties in interest, NRAP 21(a)(2). Finally, petitioner's NRAP 27(e) certificate fails to meet the requirements of that rule, TRP Fund VI, LLC v. PHH Mortg. Corp., 138 Nev., Adv. Op. 21, P.3d (2022), and his failure to provide proof of service constitutes an additional basis on which to deny relief. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

.J. Parrakuirre

AG--t J. Hardesty

lealsau.0 J. Stiglich

cc: Efren Gonzalez-Rivera Steven J. Bank Carolyn Goodman City of Las Vegas City Council

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 1947A ,giWia,

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

STEVEN J. BANK, EX REL. EFREN No. 84497 GONZALEZ-RIVERA, Petitioner, vs. FIL MAYOR CAROLYN GOODMAN; AND CITY OF LAS VEGAS CITY COUNCIL, APR 0 6 2022 Res • ondents. ELIZAETTH A. BROWN CLERK a F SUPREME COURT BY OE

ORDER DENYING EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDA.MUS OR PROHIBITION

This is an emergency, pro se, original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition seeking to preclude the City Council from considering and/or approving a rezoning request.' Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See 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, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Generally, challenges to final administrative zoning decisions must be made in the district court in the first instance. See Kay v. Nunez, 122 Nev. 1100, 1105, 146 P.3d 801, 805 (2006); Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 604, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). Further, non- attorneys may not represent another person's interests before this court,

'Although petitioner's affidavit was not notarized, it appears that he otherwise meets the NRAP 24 requirements, and we therefore grant his motion to proceed in forma pauperis and waive the filing fee. NRAP 21(e).

SUPREME COUFIT OF NEVADA

lOp 1947A 01.3- )07150 Guerin v. Guerin, 116 Nev. 210, 214, 993 P.2d 1256, 1258 (2000), and writ petitions must name and be served on all real parties in interest, NRAP 21(a)(2). Finally, petitioner's NRAP 27(e) certificate fails to meet the requirements of that rule, TRP Fund VI, LLC v. PHH Mortg. Corp., 138 Nev., Adv. Op. 21, P.3d (2022), and his failure to provide proof of service constitutes an additional basis on which to deny relief. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

.J. Parrakuirre

AG--t J. Hardesty

lealsau.0 J. Stiglich

cc: Efren Gonzalez-Rivera Steven J. Bank Carolyn Goodman City of Las Vegas City Council

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 1947A ,giWia,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bank v. Goodman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-v-goodman-nev-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack