RAYMOND MAX SNYDER v. LAUARA ANN SNYDER AND SHAWN MEADOR (2024)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This emergency pro se petition for a writ of mandamus challenges the district court's refusal to address petitioner's summary judgment motion and seeks the same relief from this court.

Whether a petition for extraordinary writ relief will be entertained rests within this court's sound discretion. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007), and it is petitioner's burden to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted, Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Having reviewed the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has failed to meet his burden. Significantly, writ petitions are not substitutes for an appeal, and petitioner has failed to show that an appeal would not provide an adequate legal remedy for his grievances here, thus precluding writ relief. Archon Corp. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. 816, 819, 407 P.3d 702, 706 (2017) (recognizing that “[a] writ of mandamus is not a substitute for an appeal”); Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (“[T]he right to appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy that precludes writ relief.”). Indeed, it appears that petitioner has filed an appeal in the underlying case, which is pending under Docket No. 88129-COA. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Cadish, C.J.

Stiglich, J.

Herndon, J.