MCMAHON v. DUNBAR (2020)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus seeking, among other things, an order directing respondents to notarize a power of attorney form.

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). But writ relief is typically not available when the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. See NRS 34.170; Int'l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558. Moreover, whether such a petition will be considered rests within our sound discretion. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

Here, a review of this petition demonstrates that petitioner has a speedy and adequate remedy available in that he can seek relief in the district court and, if aggrieved, can then appeal any adverse judgment to the appellate courts. See Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 604, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981) (applying this rule to a case where there were disputed factual issues relevant to demonstrating the propriety of writ relief). Accordingly, we decline to consider this petition, and we therefore deny it. See Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; NRAP 21(b)(1).

It is so ORDERED.