NEVADA EX REL ARPINO v. SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR COUNTY OF WASHOE (2019)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION

This original pro se petition for a writ of prohibition challenges the district court's ability to enforce an April 13, 2016, vexatious litigant order and asks that the order be removed and stricken from the record.¹

Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228. 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991); see Arpino v. Washoe Cty. Bd. of Comm'rs, Docket Nos. 70429-COA & 70494-COA (January 30, 2017, Order of Affirmance). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Petitioner has filed documents seeking correction of the caption and file-stamped copies of his petition and attachments. Although the State does not appear to bear an interest in this matter, neither any statute nor any court rule requires writ petitions to be captioned in the name of the State, and it is no longer “the universal rule of practice” to caption petitions such, we direct the clerk of this court to modify this docket's caption to reflect the caption on the petition and this order. Cf. State v. District Court, 51 Nev. 206, 273 P. 659, 660 (1929); State v. Curler, 26 Nev. 347, 67 P. 1075, 1076 (1902), 55 C.J.S. Mandamus § 339 (2015); 72A C.J.S. Prohibition § 10 (2015). The clerk of this court shall also mail petitioner a file-stamped copy of his petition and attachments.