when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004).

Having considered petitioner's arguments and the documents before this court, we conclude that extraordinary writ relief is not warranted. NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; see also NRAP 21(b). In particular, petitioner is challenging an order, entered on remand from this court, in which the district court finally established child custody. Because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy in the form of an appeal from that order, writ relief is not warranted. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (explaining that an appeal is an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief); see also NRAP 3A(b)(7) (providing that an order finally establishing or modifying child custody is appealable). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

J.

Hardesty

iP7/4 J.

Douglas

,J.

Cherry

cc: Hon. Cynthia Dianne Steel, District Judge, Family Court Division F. Peter James Sterling Law, LLC Eighth District Court Clerk SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1 ,147A are