D. v. Dist. Ct. (State, Dep'T Of Family Servs.)
This text of D. v. Dist. Ct. (State, Dep'T Of Family Servs.) (D. v. Dist. Ct. (State, Dep'T Of Family Servs.)) 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
JERRY D., No. 84774 Petitioner, VS. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE FILE ROBERT TEUTON, DISTRICT JUDGE, MAY 3 1 2022 Respondents, and ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLfg 8 PREME coma STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT BY DEPUTY OL.ERK OF FAMILY SERVICES; A.D.; AND F.D., Real Parties in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This original, emergency petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a preliminary district court order concluding that petitioner's two minor children should remain in protective custody pending further proceedings under NRS Chapter 432B. Having reviewed the petition and supporting documentation, we are not convinced 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) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). In particular, while petitioner challenges the district court's preliminary protective custody SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA findings and the representations upon which they are based, an adjudicatory hearing is scheduled for tomorrow, at which the parties may have an opportunity to present additional evidence and argument. Accordingly, we conclude that extraordinary relief is not warranted at this time, and we ORDER the petition DENIED.
Al;t4G4.-0 , J. Stiglich
61*A 4 ) J. Cadish
cc: Hon. Robert Teuton, District Judge, Family Court Division The Grigsby Law Group Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney/Juvenile Division Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, Inc. Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 9 op) 1947A
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
D. v. Dist. Ct. (State, Dep'T Of Family Servs.), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/d-v-dist-ct-state-dept-of-family-servs-nev-2022.