Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
EDUARDO ANDRES SIERRA, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; THE HONORABLE TIERRA JONES, CHIEF JUDGE; AND THE HONORABLE ROBERT W. TEUTON, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, CAROLINA SOLARI, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This emergency petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a motion to disqualify the judge presiding over the family law matter below.1 Petitioner alternatively asks that the case be reassigned to another judge under this court's supervisory authority, per Williams v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 142 Nev. Adv. Op. 5, 583 P.3d 223 (2026). Petitioner has filed an emergency motion to stay the district court proceedings pending this court's review of this matter.
A writ of mandamus is available to compel a legally required act or to control a manifest abuse of discretion. Halverson v. Miller, 124 Nev. 484, 487, 186 P.3d 893, 896 (2008); see NRS 34.160. A clear right to the relief requested must be demonstrated, id., and whether a petition for writ relief will be entertained rests within this court's sound discretion. D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007). It is petitioner's burden to demonstrate that this court's extraordinary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having reviewed the petition and supporting documents under the standards for disqualification and reassignment explained in Williams, 142 Nev. Adv. Op. 5, 583 P.3d at 227-28, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated deep-seated favoritism or antagonism, partiality, or a public-interest need to reassign the case. Accordingly, the district court did not manifestly abuse its discretion, and we thus
ORDER the petition DENIED.2
Pickering, J.
Parraguirre, J.
Bell, J.
FOOTNOTES
1. Petitioner is seeking a waiver of the filing fee for this original proceeding, asserting indigence and inability to pay it. Good cause having been demonstrated, the motion is granted. NRAP 21(g). No filing fee is due in this matter.
2. In light of this order, petitioner's emergency motion to stay the district court proceedings is denied as moot.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 93212
Decided: August 27, 2026
Court: Supreme Court of Nevada.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Make It a Preferred Google Search Source
Add to GoogleGet help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)