SOLANDER v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR COUNTY OF CLARK (2021)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

In this original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus, Dwight Conrad Solander seeks an order directing the district court to comply with its own order. A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, NRS 34.160, or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981). Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, and it is within the discretion of this court to determine if a petition will be considered. See Poulos v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 98 Nev. 453, 455, 652 P.2d 1177, 1178 (1982); see also State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 360, 662 P.2d 1338, 1339 (1983). “Petitioner[ ] carr[ies] the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.” Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

On March 24, 2020, the district court filed an order granting Solander's motion to provide transcripts at the State's expense. A different district court judge later orally modified that order without any explanation, stating she would not order any transcripts to be prepared. In response to this court's order directing answer, the district court states that the initial written order remains in effect and the transcripts have been prepared, filed, and made available to Solander. Because the district court has enforced its own order, we conclude our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted, and we

ORDER the petition DENIED.