Opinion
No. 67114
04-17-2015
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION
Having considered this original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging the proceedings leading up to the entry of a judgment against petitioners as garnishee defendants, we conclude that petitioners have not met their burden of demonstrating that our extraordinary intervention is warranted as they have an adequate legal remedy in the form of an appeal from the final judgment in the garnishee proceeding. NRS 34.160; NRS 34.330; NRS 31.460; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224-25, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 841, 844 (2004) (holding that an appeal is generally an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief and that writ relief is not available to correct an untimely appeal); Frank Settelmeyer & Sons, Inc. v. Smith & Harmer, Ltd., 124 Nev. 1206, 1214, 197 P.3d 1051, 1057 (2008) (explaining that "a judgment in favor of or against the garnishee defendant constitutes the final judgment in the garnishee proceeding, which may be appealed by an aggrieved party under NRAP 3A(a) and (b)(1)"); NRAP 21(b)(1). Accordingly, we
While petitioners titled their petition a "petition for writ of mandamus or prohibition & protective notice of appeal," notices of appeal must be filed in the district court. NRAP 3(a)(1).
ORDER the petition DENIED.
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Pickering
cc: Hon. Connie J. Steinheimer, District Judge
Clifton J. Young
Fahrendorf, Viloria, Oliphant & Oster, LLP
Doyle Law Office, PLLC
Washoe District Court Clerk