Opinion
No. 68598
08-12-2015
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA, INC.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS COMPANY LIMITED; AND DUSTIN HINDMARCH, Petitioners, v. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JERRY A. WIESE, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents, and GEORGE F. DECOU, INDIVIDUALLY; JOANN PASSER AS SPECIAL ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF MAURICE J. IORIO; AND MARY IORIO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SURVIVING SPOUSE OF MAURICE J. IORIO, DECEASED, Real Parties in Interest.
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION
This petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court's rulings related to the assertedly willful spoliation of evidence, including a "pre-instruction" to the jury and the exclusion of expert testimony related to whether the destruction of evidence was willful. Trial of the matter commenced today. Having reviewed the petition and its accompanying motion for a stay, we decline to intervene. Petitioner has a remedy at law by way of an appeal from an adverse final judgment, Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 88 P.3d 840 (2004); NRS 34.170, and we are not convinced that that remedy is inadequate under the circumstances presented, see Williams v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 127 Nev., Adv. Op. 45, 262 P.3d 360 (2001) (describing narrow exceptions when writ relief may be warranted despite availability of an alternative remedy at law). Accordingly, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issues raised in the petition, we deny the motion for a stay and
ORDER the petition DENIED.
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Cherry
/s/_________, J.
Pickering
cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge
Snell & Wilmer, LLP/Las Vegas
Greenberg Traurig LLP/Atlanta
Eglet Prince
Kemp, Jones & Coulthard, LLP
Eighth District Court Clerk