Nevada Supreme Court, 2014

Mudd v. Dist. Ct. (Oaktree Capital Mgmt., L.P.)

Mudd v. Dist. Ct. (Oaktree Capital Mgmt., L.P.)
Nevada Supreme Court · Decided August 28, 2014

Mudd v. Dist. Ct. (Oaktree Capital Mgmt., L.P.)

Opinion

CONVERTIBLE SECURITIES AND INCOME FUND II; AQR CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC; AQR CONVERTIBLE OPPORTUNITIES BOND UCITS FUND; AQR DELTA MASTER ACCOUNT, L.P.; AQR OPPORTUNISTIC PREMIUM OFFSHORE FUND L.P.; AND DELAWARE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION This original petition for a writ of mandamus, or alternatively, prohibition, challenges a district court order granting a motion to amend a complaint in a tort action.

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). A writ of prohibition may be warranted when the district court exceeds its jurisdiction. NRS 34.320. Either writ is an extraordinary remedy, and whether such a writ will be considered is within this court's sole discretion. Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991). Moreover, it is petitioners' burden to demonstrate that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

Writ relief is generally available only when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Moreover, this court has held

that the right to appeal is typically an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841.

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is warranted. NRAP 21(b)(1); Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED. 1

Hardesty

°14 Douglas 7 J.

cc: Hon. Mark R. Denton, District Judge Pisanelli Bice, PLLC Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP/Dallas Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP/Austin Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A.

Fennemore Craig Jones Vargas/Las Vegas Ann Marie Johnson Eighth District Court Clerk

'In light of this order, we deny as moot petitioners' emergency motion for a stay and petitioners' motion to file portions of their appendix under seal. We direct the clerk of the court to return, unfiled, the documents sought to be sealed when they are received in this court.

SUPREME COURT OF 3 NEVADA

(0) 1947A

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.