Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan)

Nevada Supreme Court

Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan)

DecidedMay 15, 2019

Docket78596

StatusUnpublished

This text of Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan) (Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan)) 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

Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan), (Neb. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

HARVEST MANAGEMENT SUB LLC, No. 78596 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE 1 LINDA MARIE BELL, "MA ,,------

IZt- I Respondents, OLEN= F COURT )

-

and DEPUTY c .

AARON M. MORGAN; AND DAVID E. LUJAN, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a motion for entry of judgment. Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted at this time. 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, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Accordingly, we deny petitioner's request for writ relief. We clarify that this denial is without prejudice to petitioner's ability to seek writ relief again if subsequent steps are taken to reconvene the jury. Cf. Sierra Foods v. Williams, 107 Nev. 574, 576, 816 P.2d 466, 467 (1991) ("[T]he general rule

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA I 43- yip/ (01 1947A in many jurisdictions is that a trial court is without authority or jurisdiction to reconvene a jury once it has been dismissed . . . ."). It is so ORDERED.

'of Lt..W J. LIZ4z,D , J. Stiglich Silver

cc: Hon. Linda Marie Bell, Chief Judge Bailey Kennedy Richard Harris Law Firm Rands & South & Gardner/Reno Rands, South & Gardner/Henderson Marquis Aurbach Coffing Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A otia#)

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

HARVEST MANAGEMENT SUB LLC, No. 78596 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE 1 LINDA MARIE BELL, "MA ,,------

IZt- I Respondents, OLEN= F COURT )

-

and DEPUTY c .

AARON M. MORGAN; AND DAVID E. LUJAN, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a motion for entry of judgment. Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted at this time. 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, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Accordingly, we deny petitioner's request for writ relief. We clarify that this denial is without prejudice to petitioner's ability to seek writ relief again if subsequent steps are taken to reconvene the jury. Cf. Sierra Foods v. Williams, 107 Nev. 574, 576, 816 P.2d 466, 467 (1991) ("[T]he general rule

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA I 43- yip/ (01 1947A in many jurisdictions is that a trial court is without authority or jurisdiction to reconvene a jury once it has been dismissed . . . ."). It is so ORDERED.

'of Lt..W J. LIZ4z,D , J. Stiglich Silver

cc: Hon. Linda Marie Bell, Chief Judge Bailey Kennedy Richard Harris Law Firm Rands & South & Gardner/Reno Rands, South & Gardner/Henderson Marquis Aurbach Coffing Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A otia#)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Harvest Mgmt. Sub LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harvest-mgmt-sub-llc-v-dist-ct-morgan-nev-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack