Flamingo Las Vegas Operating Co. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Petis)

• Court: Nevada Supreme Court
• Decided: February 5, 2020
• Docket: 80357
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

FLAMINGO LAS VEGAS OPERATING No. 80357 COMPANY LLC, D/B/A FLAMINGO LAS VEGAS, IMPROPERLY NAMED AS CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT CORP., Petitioner, vs. FILED THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE RICHARD SCOTTI, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and MICHAEL J. PETIS, AN INDIVIDUAL, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion to dismiss in a personal injury matter. As a general rule, "judicial economy and sound judicial administration militate against the utilization of mandamus petitions to review orders denying motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment." State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 362, 662 P.2d 1338, 1340 (1983), as modified by State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 118 Nev. 140, 147, 42 P.3d 233, 238 (2002); Buckwalter v. Dist. Court, 126 Nev. 200, 201, 234 P.3d 920, 921 (2010) (noting that "[n]ormally this court will not entertain a writ petition challenging the denial of a motion to dismise). Although the rule is not absolute, see Inel Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 122 Nev. 132, 142-43, 127 P.3d 1088, 1096 SUPREME COURT OF • NEVADA

(0) 1947A ADD zy.OWIT1 (2006), petitioner has not established that an eventual appeal does not afford an adequate legal remedy. NRS 34.170. Interlocutory review by extraordinary writ is not warranted in this case. For these reasons, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Pickering

J. J. Hardesty Cadish

cc: Hon. Richard Scotti, District Judge Brandon Smerber Law Firm Bernstein & Poisson Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(o) i947A Apo. 2