CONTROLLED CONTAMINATION SERVICES LLC v. JERI FREDERICKS AND TESLA MOTORS NV LLC (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This emergency petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges the district court's refusal to continue an upcoming jury trial despite a scheduling conflict of petitioner's counsel.

Because this court ordinarily will not consider a petition for extraordinary relief in the absence of a written order, see Rust v. Clark Cty. Sch. Dist., 103 Nev. 686, 689, 747 P.2d 1380, 1382 (1987), we directed petitioner to obtain from the district court a written order memorializing its ruling and to file and serve a supplemental appendix containing a copy of the relevant written order. Petitioner has timely done so, also submitting a supplement to its petition explaining that it continues to request relief despite the post-petition elimination of its counsel's scheduling conflict because, due to recent media attention, it chooses different lead counsel who has a scheduling conflict.

Having reviewed the petition and supporting documents, including the court's March 21, 2023, written order, we are not persuaded that the district court manifestly abused its discretion in denying the continuance such that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 680-81, 476 P.3d 1194, 1196 (2020); see also Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (explaining that petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.¹

Cadish, J.

Pickering, J.

Bell, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In light of this order, real party in interest Jeri Fredericks's motion to dismiss is denied as moot, and Fredericks is no longer required to file an answer to the petition.