From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shaw Foster Homes, Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 15, 2013
No. 62161 (Nev. Mar. 15, 2013)

Summary

In Shaw v. Foster (L. R., 5 H. L. 321) the court said at page 338: "[T]he vendor, whom I have called the trustee, was not a mere dormant trustee, he was a trustee having a personal and substantial interest in the property, a right to protect that interest, and an active right to assert that interest if anything should be done in derogation of it.

Summary of this case from Matter of De Stuers

Opinion

No. 62161

03-15-2013

SHAW FOSTER HOMES, INC.; RICHARD SHAW AND CHRISTY SHAW, Petitioners, v. THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE AND THE HONORABLE SCOTT N. FREEMAN, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and MARILYN SADLER AND JEFF KINDER, Real Parties in Interest.


An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court's denial of petitioners' motion to dismiss for failing to comply with the requirements of NRCP 16.1.

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; International Game Tech. v. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). It is within our discretion to determine if a writ petition will be considered. Smith v. District Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991).

Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted. Id. Accordingly, we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1).

It is so ORDERED.

_________, J.

Gibbons

_________, J.

Douglas

_________, J.

Saitta
cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge

Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders

Steven J. Klearman & Associates

Washoe District Court Clerk


Summaries of

Shaw Foster Homes, Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
Mar 15, 2013
No. 62161 (Nev. Mar. 15, 2013)

In Shaw v. Foster (L. R., 5 H. L. 321) the court said at page 338: "[T]he vendor, whom I have called the trustee, was not a mere dormant trustee, he was a trustee having a personal and substantial interest in the property, a right to protect that interest, and an active right to assert that interest if anything should be done in derogation of it.

Summary of this case from Matter of De Stuers

In Shaw v. Foster (L.R., 5 H.L. 321) the court said at page 338: "[T]he vendor, whom I have called the trustee, was not a mere dormant trustee, he was a trustee having a personal and substantial interest in the property, a right to protect that interest, and an active right to assert that interest if anything should be done in derogation of it.

Summary of this case from In re the Estate of De Stuers
Case details for

Shaw Foster Homes, Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court of Nev.

Case Details

Full title:SHAW FOSTER HOMES, INC.; RICHARD SHAW AND CHRISTY SHAW, Petitioners, v…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

Date published: Mar 15, 2013

Citations

No. 62161 (Nev. Mar. 15, 2013)

Citing Cases

Union Screw Co. v. American Screw Co.

BILL IN EQUITY. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. C.S. C. Bradley, for complainant; cited:…

Matter of De Stuers

234 App. Div. 728). Finally, the vendor may maintain an action for waste against the vendee in possession, if…