CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. RATEZ SHOCKENCY KING (2025)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying summary judgment in an industrial injury action. Having considered the petition and its supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted at this time. See Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). Generally, we will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying motions for summary judgment, and we are not persuaded that any exception to the general rule applies here. Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997) (discussing the exceptions to this general rule). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Pickering, J.

Cadish, J.

Lee, J.