Mcsweeney-Wilson Vs. Dist. Ct. (Storey Cty. Comm'Rs)

CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedMay 14, 2021
Docket82652
StatusPublished

This text of Mcsweeney-Wilson Vs. Dist. Ct. (Storey Cty. Comm'Rs) (Mcsweeney-Wilson Vs. Dist. Ct. (Storey Cty. Comm'Rs)) 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
Mcsweeney-Wilson Vs. Dist. Ct. (Storey Cty. Comm'Rs), (Neb. 2021).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

MARY LOU MCSWEENEY-WILSON, No. 82652 Petitioner, vs. THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF STOREY; FILED AND THE HONORABLE JAMES TODD RUSSELL, DISTRICT JUDGE, MAY 1 4 2021 Respondents, EUZABF A. BROWN CLE s1 . PREME COURT and BY STOREY COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; AND STERICYCLE, INC., Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges district court orders dismissing a petition for judicial review. Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not convinced that petitioner has met her burden of demonstrating that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. See Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev., Adv. Op. 80, 476 P.3d 1194, 1196-97 (2020) (refusing to substitute this court's judgment for that of the district court absent a manifest abuse of discretion); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (Petitioners carry the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted."); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (observing that "the issuance of a writ of mandamus or prohibition is purely discretionary with this court"). In particular, petitioner has an adequate

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0) I947A 2_1-1195C legal remedy in the form of an appeal from any adverse final judgment.' NRS 34.170; Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88P.3d at 841 ([T]he right to appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy that precludes writ relief."). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Parraguirre

Al'usbati2 , J. Stiglich

J. Silver

cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Mary Lou Wilson Storey County District Attorney McDonald Carano LLP/Reno Storey County Clerk

'Because we deny the petition, we also deny petitioner's request for a stay of the district court's order as moot.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mcsweeney-Wilson Vs. Dist. Ct. (Storey Cty. Comm'Rs), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcsweeney-wilson-vs-dist-ct-storey-cty-commrs-nev-2021.