SHERRIE SANET AND CHARLES DAILY v. GANDALF VENTURES LLC DISSOLVED NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY PREVIOUSLY DOING BUSINESS AS SYNERGY SOTHEBY INTERNATIONAL REALTY THOMAS MARSAW AND GENE NORTHUP (2026)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying a motion for partial summary judgment in a breach-of-contract action.

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted at this time. See 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); see Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (“Petitioners carry the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted.”). As a general rule subject to very few exceptions, we have declined to exercise our discretion to consider writ petitions that challenge district court orders denying summary judgment. Nevada Ass'n Servs., Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 130 Nev. 949, 953-54, 338 P.3d 1250, 1253 (2014). We decline to deviate from that rule here, particularly because a trial date has been set and the issues presented can be raised on appeal from a final judgment, so petitioners have a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy that precludes writ relief. See Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (observing that the right to appeal is an adequate legal remedy that may preclude writ relief); see also Moore v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 96 Nev. 415, 416-17, 610 P.2d 188, 189 (1980) (declining to entertain writ relief when granting relief would not resolve the entire underlying controversy). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Bell, J.

Stiglich, J.

Cadish, J.