IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

JASON KING, P.E., IN HIS OFFICIAL No. 69921 CAPACITY AS NEVADA STATE ENGINEER, STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES, Petitioner, vs. THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILED COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LYON; MAR 1 1 2016 AND THE HONORABLE LEON TRACE K. UNDEMAN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT ABERASTURI, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, LYnfl( see— faY —5

and STEVEN A. FULSTONE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE STEVEN A. FULSTONE 1989 LIVING TRUST; R.N. FULSTONE COMPANY, A NEVADA CORPORATION; CEAS COMPANY, A NEVADA CORPORATION; AND FARMERS AGAINST CURTAILMENT ORDER, LLC, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION OR MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of prohibition or, alternatively, mandamus, challenges a district court order that (1) allows the parties to present testimony on certain issues concerning a hydrological model that petitioner relied on in entering the orders challenged in the underlying judicial review matter, and (2) contemplates the testifying witnesses' reliance on additional reports or analysis in the judicial review proceeding.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that writ relief is warranted. NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004) (explaining petitioner's burden and recognizing that the right to appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief); see NRS 533.450(9) (providing a right to appeal from a district court judgment on petitions for judicial review in a water rights matter). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.'

fret4 ; J.

Hardesty

Saitta

40tem Pickering

cc: Hon. Leon Aberasturi, District Judge Attorney General/Carson City Taggart & Taggart, Ltd. Parsons Behle & Latimer/Reno Third District Court Clerk

"In light of this order, petitioner's motion to expedite is denied as moot.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A ea