S. v. Dist. Ct. (Clark Cty., Dep'T Of Family Servs.)

Supreme Court

OF

Nevapa (0) UTA eRe

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

JAMES &., No. 85476

Petitioner, vs.

THE HONORABLE MARGARET E.

PICKARD, DISTRICT JUDGE; AND

THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT E | LL fe (3

COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF

OCT 14 2022

CLARK,

Respondents, CLE ABEbRene: COURT and

CLERK

CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF

FAMILY SERVICES; AND J.S.,

Real Parties in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION

FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This original, emergency petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a district court order denying a motion in hmine in a termination of parental rights case.

Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). In particular, the availability of an appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841; see NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330. Petitioner may appeal from the district court’s final order in the 22-3246 underlying matter, if aggrieved, and we are not persuaded that such an appeal would be an inadequate remedy here. Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED. p Ma. tock, J.

Hardesty

Stiglich ~~ Herndon ec: Hon. Margaret E. Pickard, District Judge

Rosenblum Allen Law Firm, Las Vegas

Clark County District Attorney

Clark County Public Defender/Juvenile Division

Yolanda D. Miller

Eighth District Court Clerk

SupREME COURT

OF

NEvaADA (O} IOS A aeiRSSe>