PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CORPORATION AND RICHARD JAMES EVERSOLL v. MEECHELL WILLIAMS AND RENE MELENDEZ GRANADOS (2025)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges district court orders denying a motion to dismiss and denying reconsideration in a personal injury matter. Having considered the petition and its supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. Walker v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 136 Nev. 678, 681, 476 P.3d 1194, 1197 (2020) (recognizing that mandamus is an extraordinary remedy); Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (providing that writ relief “is purely discretionary with this court”). Petitioners have an adequate legal remedy in the form of an appeal from the final judgment. See Walker, 136 Nev. at 681, 683, 476 P.3d at 1197-98 (explaining that the availability of a later appeal generally precludes writ relief and rejecting the contention that writ relief would be more expeditious than an appeal in the ordinary course). Moreover, we generally will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying motions to dismiss, and we are not persuaded that any exception to the general rule applies here. Moseley v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 654, 658, 188 P.3d 1136, 1140 (2008) (outlining exceptions to this general rule). We therefore

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Herndon, C.J.

Parraguirre, J.

Stiglich, J.