FORTUNET INC v. Julie Rosten, Real Party in Interest. (2024)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the district court to reverse its award of prejudgment interest on attorney fees and release remainder of supersedeas bond.

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 Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). 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). Petitioner bears the burden to show that extraordinary relief is warranted, and such relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. See Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004). An appeal is generally an adequate remedy precluding writ relief. Id. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841.

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our intervention is warranted. Petitioner has not demonstrated that it does not have a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by way of an appeal. NRAP 3A(b)(8) (permitting an appeal from a special order entered after a final judgment, including a post-judgment order awarding or refusing attorney fees or costs); Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. Accordingly, writ relief is improper, and we

ORDER the petition DENIED.