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.
DAVID OANCEA, Petitioner, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JOE HARDY, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, CABO PLATINUM, LLC, Real Party in Interest.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION
This emergency petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court ruling denying petitioner's motion for a protective order regarding the location of petitioner's judgment debtor examination. Petitioner has also filed an emergency motion for an administrative stay.
A writ of mandamus is available to control a manifest abuse of discretion, Halverson v. Miller, 124 Nev. 484, 487, 186 P.3d 893, 896 (2008); see NRS 34.160, and a writ of prohibition is available to curb jurisdictional excess, NRS 34.320. 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, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that the district court manifestly abused its discretion or exceeded its jurisdiction such that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.1
Stiglich, J.
Cadish, J.
Lee, J.
FOOTNOTES
1. In light of this order, petitioner's motion for stay 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. 93385
Decided: September 29, 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)
Answer a few questions and get helpful next steps for your legal issue.