5212 HOLDING LLC NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY GYPSUM RESOURCES LLC NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY GYPSUM RESOURCES LLC NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY GYPSUM RESOURCES MATERIALS LLC NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY HARMONY HOLDINGS INC NEVADA CORPORATION TRUCKEE SPRINGS HOLDINGS INC NEVADA CORPORATION AND JAMES RHODES AN INDIVIDUAL v. SHAWN GOLDSTEIN AN INDIVIDUAL (2026)

ORDER DENYING PETITION

This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order vacating petitioners’ notice attempting to voluntarily dismiss their complaint.

Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 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 Jud. Dist. Ct., 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).

In this, we are not persuaded that the district court committed clear legal error in its April 30, 2026, order vacating petitioners’ notice of voluntary dismissal. Cf. State v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. (Armstrong), 127 Nev. 927, 931-32, 267 P.3d 777, 780 (2011) (observing that a writ of mandamus is available to control a “manifest abuse of discretion” and that “[a] manifest abuse of discretion is a clearly erroneous interpretation of the law or a clearly erroneous application of a law or rule” (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted)). As the district court clarified in its June 18, 2026 order, the district court relied on Nalder v. Eighth Judicial District Court, 136 Nev. 200, 208, 462 P.3d 677, 685 (2020), as the basis for its April 30 order. Although petitioners briefly mention the district court's reliance on Nalder, they have not explained why Nalder is inapplicable, much less persuaded us why the district court's reliance on Nalder amounted to clear legal error. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

Herndon, C.J.

Bell, J.

Stiglich, J.