Arpino v. Sandoval
Arpino v. Sandoval
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
JOHN FRANCIS ARPINO, No. 71771 Petitioner, vs. FILED THE HONORABLE BRIAN SANDOVAL, Respondent. JAN 1 3 2017 ELIZABETH A BROWN CLEFt}F SUPREME COURT ORDER DENYING PETITION BY DERN= This original petition seeks a writ of prohibition directing respondent to cease and desist all actions related to the appointment of the Honorable Lidia S Stiglich to fill the seat on this court vacated when the Honorable Nancy M. Saitta retired." Having considered the petition and other documents submitted by petitioner, we conclude that a writ of prohibition is not warranted. See NRS 34.320 ("[The writ of prohibition] arrests the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board or person exercising judicial functions, when such proceedings are without or in excess of the jurisdiction of such tribunal, corporation, board or person.").
We therefore ORDER the petition DENIED.
Douglas
Gibbon's Pickering 'Petitioner designated this matter as an "emergency" under NRAP 27(e), but he has not identified a specific date by which action is necessary, see NRAP 27(e)(2).
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (D) 1947A e cc: John Francis Arpino Attorney General/Carson City
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A eleeirD
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.