IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ARTHUR HARRISON, AN INDIVIDUAL, No. 72272 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE FEL D HONORABLE ELIZABETH GOFF MAR 17 2617 GONZALEZ, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, OLE I

and J CLER; BRUCE DENNISTON, AS GUARDIAN FOR THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF JEREMY DENNISTON; BRUCE DENNISTON AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF KERRI DENNISTON AND ON BEHALF OF STATUTORY WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARIES JEREMY DENNISTON, ASHLEY TEXLEY AND MICHAEL DENNISTON; ERNEST STEVE AND RACHEL UNDERLAND, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND THE MARITAL COMMUNITY COMPRISED THEREOF AND THE NATURAL PARENTS OF GARRETT UNDERLAND; STACY TAYLOR, THE COURT-APPOINTED PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF GARRETT UNDERLAND; AND LEWIS KINDER AND CHERYL KINDER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AND THE MARITAL COMMUNITY COMPRISED THEREOF, Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF PROHIBITION OR MANDAMUS This original petition for a writ of prohibition or mandamus challenges a district court order denying a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction or for forum non conveniens.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

(0/ 1947A e Having considered the petition and the supporting documents, we conclude that our intervention is unwarranted, as real parties in interest have made a prima facie showing that petitioner is subject to personal jurisdiction in Nevada. See Trump v. Eighth Judicial Dist.

Court, 109 Nev. 687, 693, 857 P.2d 740, 744 (1993) ("In determining whether a prima facie showing has been made, the district court is not acting as a fact finder. It accepts properly supported proffers of evidence by a plaintiff as true."). Nor are we persuaded on the record presented that the district court abused its discretion in denying petitioner's motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens. See Provincial Gov't of Marinduque v. Placer Dome, Inc., 131 Nev., Adv. Op. 35, 350 P.3d 392, 395-96 (2015) (reviewing a district court's decision regarding forum non conveniens dismissal for an abuse of discretion and recognizing that exceptional circumstances must exist to support such a dismissal); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Din. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Gibboris Pickering cc: Hon. Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, District Judge Thorndal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger/Reno Thorndal Armstrong Delk Balkenbush & Eisinger/Las Vegas Law Office of Julie A. Mersch Coluccio Law Friedman Rubin/Bremerton Matthew L. Sharp, Ltd. SUPREME COURT Eighth District Court Clerk OF NEVADA (0) 1947A m:giDE)