THOMAS GONZALES DDS INDIVIDUALLY AND TRUSTEE OF THOMAS GONZALES LTD AND THOMAS GONZALES LTD v. ANGELA BANKS OLIVER (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges district court orders denying motions to dismiss.¹ Having considered the petition and its documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 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). Generally, we will not consider writ petitions challenging orders denying motions to dismiss, and we are not persuaded that any exception to the general rule applies here. Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197-98, 179 P.3d 556, 558-59 (2008) (discussing writ petitions challenging denials of motions to dismiss). We therefore

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Stiglich, C.J.

Lee, J.

Bell, J.

FOOTNOTES

1.   One motion to dismiss was denied only in part.