S. Nev. Auto Sales, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Gonzales, M.D.)

CourtNevada Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 11, 2022
Docket84903
StatusPublished

This text of S. Nev. Auto Sales, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Gonzales, M.D.) (S. Nev. Auto Sales, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Gonzales, M.D.)) 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
S. Nev. Auto Sales, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Gonzales, M.D.), (Neb. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

SOUTHERN NEVADA AUTO SALES, No. 84903 LLC, D/B/A OPEN LOT USED CAR SALES,

Petitioner,

vs.

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILED COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF AUG 1.1 2022 CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE BITA

YEAGER, DISTRICT JUDGE, CUEBICSF gAPREME COURT Respondents, DEPUTY CLERK and

FRANKIE GONZALES, M.D., Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying a motion to dismiss in a torts action. Having considered the petition and its documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 683, A76 P.3d 1194, 1198 (2020) (declining to grant writ relief when a later appeal was available); 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). Generally, we will not consider writ petitions that challenge orders denying

motions to dismiss, and we are not persuaded that any exception to the

Supreme Court OF Nevaba

C2-l5 206

(0) 19474 eR general rule applies here. Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197-98, 179 P.3d 556, 558-59 (2008) (discussing writ petitions challenging denials of motions to dismiss). We therefore

ORDER the petition DENIED.!

a Parraguirre

Silver Gibbon?

ec: Hon. Bita Yeager, District Judge Kravitz Schnitzer Johnson Watson & Zeppenfeld, Chtd. Injury Lawyers of Nevada Huang & Associates Eighth District Court Clerk

1The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the decision of this matter under a general order of assignment.

SuPREME CouRT OF NEVADA

(0) 19474 eb

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
S. Nev. Auto Sales, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Gonzales, M.D.), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/s-nev-auto-sales-llc-v-dist-ct-gonzales-md-nev-2022.