HILL v. Serina Tulili Leiataua, Real Party in Interest. (2018)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying, on reconsideration, a motion to strike expert witness reports.

Having reviewed this petition and the supporting documents, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted. See NRAP 21(b); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). In particular, trial is scheduled to commence next week, and petitioner has an adequate and speedy legal remedy in the form of an appeal from any adverse final judgment, precluding writ relief. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 225, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004); see also Archon Corp. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 133 Nev., Adv. Op. 101, 407 P.3d 702, 706 (2017) (recognizing that “[a] writ of mandamus is not a substitute for an appeal,” but rather, the writ should be used sparingly, “for extraordinary causes”). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of this order, petitioner's emergency motion for stay is denied as moot.