MICHAEL BELZER v. DAWN JONES (2023)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the district court to vacate an order terminating parental rights. This court has original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, and the issuance of such extraordinary relief is solely within this court's discretion. See Nev. Const. art. 6, § 4; D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007). Petitioner bears the burden to show that extraordinary relief is warranted, and such relief is proper only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004). An appeal is generally an adequate remedy precluding writ relief. Id. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. Even when an appeal is not immediately available because the challenged order is interlocutory in nature, the fact that the order may ultimately be challenged on appeal from a final judgment generally precludes writ relief. Id. at 225, 88 P.3d at 841.

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. As an initial matter, petitioner has not demonstrated that an appeal from a final judgment below would not afford a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy. See NRS 34.170. Further, it appears that the district court issued an order on May 11, 2023, acknowledging that real party in interest has filed an amended petition to terminate parental rights and granting petitioner's motion to declare the order terminating parental rights void. Thus, it appears that this petition is moot. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Stiglich, C.J.

Cadish, J.

Herndon, J.