Bautista v. Dist. Ct. (Picone)
This text of Bautista v. Dist. Ct. (Picone) (Bautista v. Dist. Ct. (Picone)) 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.
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
RENELYN BAUTISTA, No, 72654 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF Fh, CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE MATHEW HARTER, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and JAMES PICONE, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying petitioner's motion to modify child custody. Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. 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, petitioner has an adequate
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A -1912-1 remedy in the form of an appeal." Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841; Burton v. Burton, 99 Nev. 698, 700, 669 P.2d 703, 705 (1983). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.
J. Douglas
Pie/lebt , J. Pickering
cc: Hon. Mathew Harter, District Judge Black & LoBello James Picone Eighth District Court Clerk
'Petitioner has also requested this court disqualify the district court judge. We conclude she has an adequate legal remedy in the form of a motion to disqualify filed in the district court. See NRS 1.235.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A •
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bautista v. Dist. Ct. (Picone), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bautista-v-dist-ct-picone-nev-2017.