Opinion
No. 80410
02-05-2020
Thomas W. UMBACH, M.D., Petitioner, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Joseph Hardy, Jr., District Judge, Respondents, and Christian Mquown, Real Party in Interest.
Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas The Dysart Law Firm, PC Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP
Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas
The Dysart Law Firm, PC
Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion to dismiss in a medical malpractice action.
As a general rule, "judicial economy and sound judicial administration militate against the utilization of mandamus petitions to review orders denying motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment." State ex rel. Dep’t of Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 362, 662 P.2d 1338, 1340 (1983), as modified by State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 118 Nev. 140, 147, 42 P.3d 233, 238 (2002) ; Buckwalter v. Dist. Court, 126 Nev. 200, 201, 234 P.3d 920, 921 (2010) (noting that "[n]ormally this court will not entertain a writ petition challenging the denial of a motion to dismiss"). Although the rule is not absolute, see Int’l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 122 Nev. 132, 142-43, 127 P.3d 1088, 1096 (2006), petitioner has not established that an eventual appeal does not afford an adequate legal remedy. NRS 34.170. Interlocutory review by extraordinary writ is not warranted in this case. For these reasons, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.