LOPEZ v. Sherry L. Matzdorff, Individually; and Sherry L. Matzdorff, as the Guardian and Natural Mother of Rachel L. Matzdorff, a Minor, Real Parties in Interest. (2021)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus or, alternatively, prohibition challenges district court orders granting a motion in limine to exclude expert witness testimony and denying related requests for relief in a tort action.

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). A writ of prohibition may issue to arrest the proceedings of a district court exercising its judicial functions when such proceedings are in excess of the district court's jurisdiction. See NRS 34.320; Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Whether a petition for extraordinary writ relief will be entertained rests within this court's sound discretion. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007). Petitioner bears 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).

Based on our review of the filings in this matter, as well as the arguments set forth therein, we conclude that petitioner has failed to meet her burden of demonstrating that extraordinary writ relief is warranted. See id. Accordingly, we deny the petition. NRAP 21(b)(1); D.R. Horton, 123 Nev. at 475, 168 P.3d at 737.

It is so ORDERED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of our disposition of this matter, we vacate the stay ordered by this court on March 18, 2021.