DOUGLAS v. Arren Douglas, Real Party in Interest. (2026)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is an emergency original pro se petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging an order purportedly denying petitioner relief following the entry of a stipulated divorce decree. A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). A writ of prohibition arrests the proceedings of a tribunal that is acting in excess of, or without, jurisdiction. NRS 34.320. The decision to entertain a petition for extraordinary writ relief is within our sole discretion, and the petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that such relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Having considered the petition, we conclude that petitioner has not carried his burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted at this time. In particular, there was no appendix filed that included “a copy of any order or opinion, parts of the record before the respondent judge, ․ or any other original document that may be essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition.” NRAP 21(a)(4). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of this order, we deny petitioner's emergency motion for stay as moot.