Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano)

Nevada Supreme Court

Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano)

DecidedMarch 5, 2018

Docket75215

StatusUnpublished

This text of Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano) (Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano)) 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

Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano), (Neb. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

HYGEA HOLDINGS CORP., No. 75215 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILED CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE NANCY L. ALLF, DISTRICT JUDGE, MAR 0 5 2018 Respondents, ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT and BY DEPUTY CLE CLAUDIO ARELLANO; CROWN EQUITY'S LLC; FIFTH AVENUE 2254 LLC; HALEVI ENTERSPRISES LLC; HALEVI SV 1 LLC; HALEVI SV 2 LLC; HILLCREST ACQUISTIONS LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV I LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV II LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV III LLC; IBH CAPITAL LLC; LEONITE CAPITAL LLC; N5HYG LLC; AND RYMSSG GROUP, LLC, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original, emergency petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court oral ruling denying a motion to dismiss an action for receivership for lack of jurisdiction. Having considered the petition and the appendix, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted at this time. See NRAP 21(b); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997) (observing that this court generally will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) I947A I -01055(0 motions to dismiss). In particular, additional proceedings are scheduled to take place in the district court this week, and petitioner has an adequate and speedy legal remedy in the form of an appeal from any order appointing a receiver, precluding writ relief. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; NRAP 3A(b)(4); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 225, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

J.

Parraguirre

cc: Hon. Nancy L. Allf, District Judge Ballard Spahr LLP/Las Vegas The Miller Law Firm, P.C. Albright Stoddard Warnick & Albright Holley, Driggs, Walch, Fine, Wray, Puzey & Thompson/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

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

HYGEA HOLDINGS CORP., No. 75215 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILED CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE NANCY L. ALLF, DISTRICT JUDGE, MAR 0 5 2018 Respondents, ELIZABETH A. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT and BY DEPUTY CLE CLAUDIO ARELLANO; CROWN EQUITY'S LLC; FIFTH AVENUE 2254 LLC; HALEVI ENTERSPRISES LLC; HALEVI SV 1 LLC; HALEVI SV 2 LLC; HILLCREST ACQUISTIONS LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV I LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV II LLC; HILLCREST CENTER SV III LLC; IBH CAPITAL LLC; LEONITE CAPITAL LLC; N5HYG LLC; AND RYMSSG GROUP, LLC, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original, emergency petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court oral ruling denying a motion to dismiss an action for receivership for lack of jurisdiction. Having considered the petition and the appendix, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted at this time. See NRAP 21(b); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997) (observing that this court generally will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) I947A I -01055(0 motions to dismiss). In particular, additional proceedings are scheduled to take place in the district court this week, and petitioner has an adequate and speedy legal remedy in the form of an appeal from any order appointing a receiver, precluding writ relief. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; NRAP 3A(b)(4); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 225, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

J.

Parraguirre

cc: Hon. Nancy L. Allf, District Judge Ballard Spahr LLP/Las Vegas The Miller Law Firm, P.C. Albright Stoddard Warnick & Albright Holley, Driggs, Walch, Fine, Wray, Puzey & Thompson/Las Vegas Eighth District Court Clerk

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hygea Holdings Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Arellano), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hygea-holdings-corp-v-dist-ct-arellano-nev-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack