Opinion
No. 83788
12-17-2021
Gloria ZAPATA, as Special Administrator for the Estate of Jonathan Blackstone, Deceased; and Mitchell Blackstone, Individually and as Heir to the Estate of Jonathan Blackstone, Petitioners, v. The EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT of the State of Nevada, IN AND FOR the COUNTY OF CLARK; and the Honorable Monica Trujillo, District Judge, Respondents, and Showcase 1415 LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; Showcase Cosmo LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; EC 2537 Realty LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; Showcase Investors 3 LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; Las Vegas 3, LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; Showcase Mall Vegas Management LLC, a Business Entity Incorporated to do Business in the State of Nevada; BG Retail, LLC, f/k/a Brown Group Retail, Inc., d/b/a Famous Footwear, a Foreign Business Entity Conducting Business in Nevada; and U.S. Security Associates, Inc., a Foreign Business Entity Conducting Business in Nevada, Real Parties in Interest.
Richard Harris Law Firm Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP/Las Vegas Pyatt Silvestri
Richard Harris Law Firm
Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP/Las Vegas
Pyatt Silvestri
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS
This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order granting a motion to dismiss. Having considered the petition and its supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court , 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 Judicial Dist. Court , 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). Specifically, we generally decline to exercise our discretion to entertain writ petitions challenging orders resolving motions to dismiss, and we are not convinced any of the exceptions apply in this case. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court , 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997) (discussing the exceptions to the general rule). We therefore,
The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the decision of this matter under a general order of assignment.