ROWLAND MARCUS ANDRADE v. STATE BAR OF NEVADA (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges the State Bar's refusal to pursue a complaint against certain attorneys. Having considered the petition and appendices filed in this matter, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See NRS 34.160; Halverson v. Miller, 124 Nev. 484, 487, 186 P.3d 893, 896 (2008) (recognizing that the decision to issue a writ of mandamus “is solely within this court's discretion” and that petitioner bears the burden to establish that such extraordinary relief is appropriate). In particular, petitioner has demonstrated neither a legal right to have the State Bar pursue a complaint under the relevant facts nor that the State Bar manifestly abused its discretion in declining to do so. See Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 680-81, 476 P.3d 1194, 1197-98 (2020) (providing that writ relief is available where a party demonstrates a legal right to a district court taking a particular action or where the district court manifestly abuses its discretion). Compare SCR 105 (giving the State Bar discretion to pursue formal disciplinary charges following a grievance), with SCR 111(4) (requiring the State Bar to investigate an attorney's second offense of a crime involving alcohol or controlled substances), and SCR 114(2) (requiring the State Bar to pursue reciprocal discipline if it is proven that the attorney was disciplined in another jurisdiction). We therefore

ORDER the petition DENIED,

Stiglich, C.J.

Lee, J.

Bell, J.