Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.160

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a state board to perform a duty required by law.

EICON v. State Bd. of Exam'rs · filed 2001-04-12

Because the Board has decided, based on the Attorney General's opinion letter, not to review the merits of the agreement, mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel performance of a duty required of the Board by Nevada law.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a board to perform a duty required by Nevada law.

Employers Insurance Co. of Nevada v. State Board of Examiners · filed 2001-04-12

Because the Board has decided, based on the Attorney General’s opinion letter, not to review the merits of the agreement, mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel performance of a duty required of the Board by Nevada law.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a court clerk to perform filing and recordkeeping duties required by law.

Sullivan v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 1995-11-01

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station. NRS 34.160. The clerk of the district court has an absolute duty to file petitioner’s application and to properly receive and keep a record of petitioner’s complaint. Accordingly, we grant this petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a public officer to perform a duty required by law.

Business Computer Rentals v. State Treasurer · filed 1998-01-22

We conclude that petitioner has demonstrated that a writ of mandamus is warranted. Such a writ is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See Round Hill Gen. Imp. Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 637 P.2d 534 (1981). Based upon the lease agreement’s nonappropriation clause and provisions for repossession of the leased equipment, the Nevada Constitution’s limitation on public debt is not implicated. Accordingly, as long as the contract is otherwise enforceable, the State Treasurer has an obligation to make the required payments under the lease agreement. We therefore grant the petition and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the State Treasurer to make any base payments due under the lease agreement.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to direct a justice court to vacate an order beyond its jurisdiction and perform its duty to hold a preliminary hearing.

Woerner v. Justice Court · filed 2000-06-05

We conclude that the district attorney is correct and that a writ of mandamus should issue directing the justice’s court to hold a preliminary hearing after vacating its order sending petitioner to Lake’s Crossing for a competency evaluation.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a county board to give effect to an approval vote when the vote creates a duty to act.

Falcke v. County of Douglas · filed 2000-07-14

By virtue of its vote, we further conclude that the Board has a duty under NRS 34.160 to give effect to its vote and approve Falcke’s master plan amendment. Accordingly, we grant Falcke’s petition. The clerk of this court shall issue a writ of mandamus compelling the Board to approve Falcke’s application for a master plan amendment.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an official duty, including production of public records required by law.

DR Partners v. Board of County Commissioners · filed 2000-08-18

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, see NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Mandamus is the appropriate procedural remedy to compel production of the public records sought in this case.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a public officer to perform a duty required by law.

Nevada Mining Ass'n v. Erdoes · filed 2001-07-17

A writ of mandamus is available to compel a public officer to perform an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform a legally required review.

Marquis & Aurbach v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark · filed 2006-11-30

The district court was legally compelled to review the first panel’s award under the plain language of SCR 155(4)(a). Because it failed to do so, the order confirming the arbitration award must be vacated, and thus we grant Tompkins’s petition.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to require filing officers to exclude ineligible candidates from the ballot, even though no law requires those officers to investigate candidates’ qualifications.

Miller v. Burk · filed 2008-07-25

Thus, even though no law directs the filing officers to inquire into a candidate’s qualifications for office, a writ of mandamus may issue to require the filing officers to comply with the law by excluding the candidates’ names from the ballot.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law.

Ryan v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 2007-10-11

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act which the law requires.

Section 34.160 permits a mandamus petition to challenge a candidate’s qualifications on term-limit grounds when the matter is of statewide importance.

Child v. Lomax · filed 2008-07-25

With regard to the first issue, under the circumstances presented in this original proceeding involving a matter of statewide importance, a petition for mandamus relief is an appropriate way in which to challenge a candidate’s qualifications on term-limit grounds.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act that the law requires as a duty of office.

Winkle v. Foster · filed 2011-07-14

She therefore seeks to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, something for which a writ may be issued. See NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform a required NRCP 23 analysis.

D.R. Horton, Inc. v. Dist. Ct. (Paradise Court Homeowners Assoc.) · filed 2013-04-18

Thus, in light of our opinion in Beazer Homes, we conclude that partial relief is appropriate insofar as D.R. Horton asks this court to order the district court to conduct a thorough NRCP 23 analysis. See International Game Tech. v. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008) ("A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station. ."); see NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform a legal duty, including accounting for a guardian ad litem’s statutory entitlement to reasonable compensation.

Haley v. DIST. CT. · filed 2012-04-05

"`A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.'" Williams v. Dist. Ct., 127 Nev. ___, ___, 262 P.3d 360, 364 (2011) (quoting International Game Tech. v. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008)); NRS 34.160. ... Because the guardian ad litem is statutorily entitled to a reasonable amount in compensation, we grant petitioners' request for mandamus relief in this respect.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a county to perform its statutory duty to fund a health district.

Clark County v. Southern Nevada Health District · filed 2012-12-06

Because NRS Chapter 439 does not provide any statutory remedy for a health district to compel a county to comply with the funding requirements of NRS 439.365 and given that SNHD is seeking funds that, under our interpretation of that statute, Clark County improperly withheld, we conclude that a writ of mandamus represents the proper vehicle for compelling Clark County to comply with its duty to fully fund SNHD in compliance with NRS 439.365.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a court to perform a legally required duty, including conducting a proper NRCP 23 analysis.

Chartered Dev. Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Cottonwood on Alexander) · filed 2013-03-18

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station . ." International Game Tech. v. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); see also NRS 34.160. Here, we conclude that partial relief is warranted, as the district court's order demonstrates that it did not conduct a thorough NRCP 23 analysis.

Section 34.160 makes mandamus the appropriate writ to seek performance of a legally required official duty.

Lorton v. Jones · filed 2014-02-20

Additionally, as the issue presented by this petition concerns whether, as a matter of law, respondents are required to exclude Sferrazza and Dortch from the 2014 ballot materials and does not involve any question regarding the exercise of judicial functions, we conclude that mandamus, rather than prohibition, is the appropriate vehicle for seeking the relief requested by Lorton.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a justice court to perform a clear duty imposed by binding precedent.

State v. Okroi (Patrick) · filed 2013-09-18

Consequently, the district court properly determined that "the justice court ignored a clear duty to follow binding precedent by requiring petitioner to provide a more exacting waiver instead of proceeding with the preliminary hearing as requested by the petitioner" and did not abuse its discretion by granting Okroi's petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform an act required by law.

In re CityCenter Constr. & Lien Litig · filed 2013-10-03

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." ... We grant Converse's petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the dismissal of the amended pleadings.

Section 34.160 authorizes mandamus to compel an official to perform a duty already required by law.

Stockmeier v. Green · filed 2014-12-31

We therefore conclude that Stockmeier has demonstrated that a writ of mandamus was warranted to compel Green to carry out the duties articulated by that statute, NRS 34.160 (providing that mandamus relief is appropriate "to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station"); Mineral Cnty. v. State, Dep't of Conservation & Natural Res., 117 Nev. 235, 242-43, 20 P.3d 800, 805 (2001) (holding that, in order for mandamus relief to be appropriate, "the action being compelled must be one already required by law"), and that the district court abused its discretion in denying Stockmeier's petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 requires a petitioner seeking mandamus to show that the requested act is a duty required by law.

Morrow v. Bisbee · filed 2015-04-17

Morrow fails to demonstrate that disclosure of his parole file was a duty required by law; therefore, he fails to demonstrate that he was entitled to extraordinary relief.

Section 34.160 requires a petitioner seeking mandamus to demonstrate a duty required by law.

Brandon (Tony) v. Fifth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2015-04-29

Petitioner Tony Morris Brandon fails to demonstrate that a duty was required by law or that the district court acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction.

Section 34.160 authorizes mandamus to compel a district court to perform an act required by law.

Br Constr., LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Holbrook Beef and Cattle Co., LLC) · filed 2015-05-29

Thus, without deciding the prejudice issue, mandamus is warranted, NRS 34.160 (providing that mandamus will issue to compel an act enjoined by law); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Din. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45 & n.1, 1348, 950 P.2d 280, 281 & n.1, 283 (1997), and we ORDER the petition GRANTED AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF THIS COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS instructing the district court to grant the motion to dismiss under NRCP 41(e).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel performance of a legally required duty, including a mandatory transfer of a petition.

Legrand v. Dist. Ct. (Sutton (Kevin)) · filed 2015-12-16

Because NRS 34.738(2)(b) compels the district court to transfer Sutton's postconviction petition to the Eighth Judicial District Court, a writ of mandamus is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform a legally required transfer of a postconviction petition.

Legrand v. Dist. Ct. (Dearion (Wayne)) · filed 2015-12-16

Because NRS 34.738(2)(b) compels the district court to transfer Dearion's postconviction petition to the Eighth Judicial District Court, a writ of mandamus is warranted.

Section 34.160 requires a petitioner seeking mandamus to demonstrate a duty required by law.

Ediga (Michael) v. Dist. Ct. (The City of Las Vegas) · filed 2015-12-17

First, he fails to demonstrate that a duty was required by law. See NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 does not authorize mandamus to compel an agency to perform an act the law does not require.

STATE, DEP'T OF PUB. SAFETY VS. COLEY · filed 2016-03-03

Procedurally, the district court erred in granting Coley mandamus relief because the law does not require the Division to accept applications.

Section 34.160 makes mandamus available to compel performance of an act required by law.

Percival v. Dist. Ct. (Balangue) · filed 2016-04-22

However, petitioners also request that this court grant writ relief directing the district court to dismiss all pending proceedings. After review of the record and applicable law, we •conclude that our extraordinary relief is not warranted as to this issue. See NRS 34.160 (providing that a writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel the filing of a motion to correct an illegal sentence when filing is a ministerial duty.

Wirth v. the Fifth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2016-06-13

We have consistently held that the district court clerk has a ministerial duty to accept and file documents presented for filing if those documents are in proper form. ... Accordingly, we ORDER the petition GRANTED AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF THIS COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS instructing the district court to FILE THE MOTION TO CORRECT AN ILLEGAL SENTENCE.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to act only when law requires it to perform that act.

Stapleton (James) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2017-01-12

Petitioner has not identified any legal authority supporting his claim that the district court must hear his application ex parte, see NRS 34.160 (providing that a writ of mandamus may issue to compel performance of "an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station"), and he has not shown that the district court arbitrarily or capriciously exercised or manifestly abused its discretion, see State v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court (Armstrong), 127 Nev. 927, 931-32, 267 P.3d 777, 780 (2011) (defining arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion and manifest abuse of discretion in the context of mandamus).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to require a new parole hearing when the Board's clear misapplication of its guidelines impairs an inmate's statutory right to consideration for parole.

ANSELMO (MICHAEL) VS. BISBEE · filed 2017-06-29

Given the Board's clear error, we conclude that extraordinary relief is necessary in this instance. ... Therefore, we grant Anselmo's petition for extraordinary relief, and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the Board to vacate its November 17, 2014, denial of parole and conduct a new parole hearing in which NAC 213.518(2)(k) is not applied.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an official to perform a duty required by law.

The Fifth Judicial Dist. Ct. v. The Cty. Of Nye · filed 2022-06-29

The action petitioners seek to compel is a ministerial duty of the Board required by law.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to restore a party’s right to proceed when a court unlawfully precludes that right.

Maheu v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark, Dept. No. 6 · filed 1972-01-28

Under NRS 34.160, mandamus lies "to compel the admission of a party to the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which he is entitled and from which he is unlawfully precluded." ... Here, although Maheu's counsel afforded the court an opportunity to correct its own error, it refused to do so and continued to preclude Maheu's right. Mandamus lies to gain admission to a precluded right to proceed.

Section 34.160 permits a party to seek district court protection by mandamus when Medical-Legal Screening Panel proceedings infringe an independently existing statutory privilege.

Ashokan v. State, Department of Insurance · filed 1993-07-09

Where the Panel proceedings infringe upon such a privilege, a party may resort to the district court for protection of that privilege.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus directing a district court to resolve a pending motion it has not considered.

Benson (Fredrick) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2018-03-15

Having reviewed the documents presented to this court, we conclude that relief is warranted. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170. Although the State is correct that the motion to obtain a copy of the sealed record was filed in the district court, and thus petitioner is not entitled to any relief on this basis, the motion rem ains pending in the district court and has not been considered. ... Accordingly, we ORDER the petition GRANTED AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF THIS COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS instructing the district court to resolve the motion filed on September 18, 2017, within 30 days from the date of this order.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a court to exercise its statutory jurisdiction when it refuses to entertain an action.

City of Las Vegas v. Las Vegas Municipal Court · filed 1994-08-10

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... A writ of mandamus is appropriate to remedy the municipal court’s refusal to entertain an action under its statutorily defined jurisdiction. NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 requires a mandamus request to compel government action affecting property rights to be addressed in state court.

Southwest Advertising, Inc. v. County of Clark · filed 2002-05-08

Hence the necessity of NRS 34.160 which requires that writs of mandamus seeking to force action by a governmental agency which impacts property rights should be addressed by the state courts for the determination of property rights.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a district court to grant a motion it was required to grant.

CUSTOM CABINET FACTORY v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2003-02-12

Consequently, the district court was compelled to grant petitioners' motion to strike the trial de novo request and manifestly abused its discretion in denying that motion. Our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is therefore warranted, and we grant this petition. [15] The clerk of this court shall issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to grant the motion to strike the trial de novo request and to enter judgment on the arbitration award filed on July 5, 2001.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus review of a vexatious litigant order for a manifest abuse of discretion, including failure to follow established procedures.

Peck v. Crouser · filed 2013-02-28

We further conclude that writ relief is the appropriate vehicle to review vexatious litigant orders because review of such orders will involve whether the district court manifestly abused its discretion, such as where the district court fails to follow the clearly established procedures for imposing a vexatious litigant order, ...; see also NRS 34.160; ... or to prevent the district court from acting in the absence of jurisdiction.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief from a continuance when the district court has set discovery deadlines and the continuance is not indefinite.

Brudjar v. Dist. Ct. (Brudjar) · filed 2014-05-14

Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we conclude that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is not warranted. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851; NRAP 21(b)(1). The district court has discretion to grant or deny continuances. See Bongiovi v. Sullivan, 122 Nev. 556, 570, 138 P.M 433, 444 (2006). We note that the continuance here was not indefinite, but rather the district court set discovery deadlines for June 2014. Under these circumstances, we conclude that extraordinary writ relief is not warranted at this time.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus directing a district court to grant summary judgment when the petitioner demonstrates that extraordinary relief is warranted and summary judgment is clearly required.

Smith v. Dist. Ct. (Morgan) · filed 2014-06-12

Thus, we conclude that petitioner has met his burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted, that summary judgment is clearly required, and that the district court is compelled to grant his motion for summary judgment.

Section 34.160 permits discretionary mandamus review of a denial of summary judgment when no facts are disputed and a statute or rule clearly requires judgment.

Gatlin, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Sadler) · filed 2014-11-14

This court generally exercises its discretion to consider petitions for writ relief challenging district court orders denying summary judgment only if no disputed factual issues exist and a statute or rule clearly requires summary judgment.

Section 34.160 requires a petitioner seeking mandamus against a district judge to establish an unperformed official duty or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Silva (Ronald) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2015-05-18

Moreover, even if this court were inclined to review the proceedings below, petitioner has failed to establish that the district court judge failed to perform any duty of her office or exercised her discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to stay a temporary custody modification made without findings on the children's best interests.

Graves v. Dist. Ct. (Kuykendall) · filed 2015-08-28

For such a modification to custody, the court was required to consider the children's best interest and its failure to do so constitutes an arbitrary and capricious abuse of discretion. See NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). ... Accordingly, we grant this petition and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to stay its August 24, 2015, written order pending the evidentiary hearing and decision on custody and relocation scheduled for November 2015 in District Court Case No. D-10-431675.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus review of a judicial disqualification ruling; the court considers whether the chief judge manifestly abused or arbitrarily or capriciously exercised discretion.

Walker (James) v. Dist. Ct. (Warden) · filed 2016-09-16

In the context of mandamus, which is an acceptable avenue to seek judicial disqualification, ... we consider whether the chief judge's ruling was a manifest abuse ... or arbitrary or capricious exercise of his discretion, Redecker v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct., 122 Nev. 164, 167, 127 P.3d 520, 522 (2006).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus relief when a court makes a parentage determination without required notice and an evidentiary hearing.

Polutnik Vs. Dist. Ct. (State, Dep'T Of Family Servs.) · filed 2021-09-17

Having considered the petition, answers, reply, and supporting documents, we conclude that writ relief is warranted because the district court should have held an evidentiary hearing before making a parentage determination when there was no current parentage information available and when the party who may oppose the parentage request was not provided notice of the action.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus review of an order denying a pretrial habeas petition when the petitioner meets the requirements for mandamus relief, including showing a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Patel (Chiragkumar) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2021-05-14

Instead, petitioner can seek this court's review through a mandamus proceeding, provided he meets the requirements for mandamus relief. ... We are not convinced that petitioner has demonstrated a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to decide habeas petitions challenging whether a preliminary examination established probable cause.

State v. Ricci · filed 1972-04-06

The court’s duty is to decide the issue and either discharge the petitioners, NRS 34.500(7); 34.640, or continue them under restraint, NRS 34.550; 34.640. ... Accordingly, we grant the requested writs and direct the district court to rule upon the petitions for habeas corpus tendered to that court by Ricci and Ellington, i.e., to decide whether the record of the preliminary examination contains sufficient evidence to sustain the magistrate’s finding of probable cause to hold them for trial.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to rule on a constitutional speedy-trial claim before allowing the State to dismiss the information without prejudice.

Brown (David) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2013-03-13

Therefore, we conclude that the district court disregarded its duty to rule on petitioner's constitutional speedy-trial claim before permitting the State to dismiss the information without prejudice. See NRS 34.160; State v. Dist. Ct. (Armstrong), 127 Nev. „ 267 P.3d 777, 779-80 (2011) (discussing when a writ of mandamus will issue).

Section 34.160 provides a mandamus remedy to seek the proper filing of a post-conviction habeas petition.

Austin (Jeffrey) v. Warden · filed 2013-03-14

properly file petitioner's post-conviction habeas petition should be raised in a petition for a writ of mandamus. NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 does not permit a writ of mandamus to challenge the validity of a judgment of conviction.

O'Keefe (Brian) v. State · filed 2014-06-12

First, appellant improperly challenged the validity of a judgment of conviction through a petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 does not permit a writ of mandamus to challenge the validity of a criminal conviction.

O'Keefe (Brian) v. State · filed 2014-07-23

First, appellant improperly challenged the validity of a judgment of conviction through a petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 does not provide mandamus as a way to challenge a judgment of conviction; that challenge must begin with a postconviction habeas petition in district court.

Newton, Jr. (Charles) v. the Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2016-11-17

This petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a judgment of conviction. Without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised in the documents submitted in this matter, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170. A challenge to the validity of the judgment of conviction must be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court in the first instance.' NRS 34.724(2)(b); NRS 34.738(1).

Section 34.160 does not provide mandamus relief to challenge a judgment of conviction; that challenge must first be raised in a postconviction habeas petition in district court.

Dial (Cedric) v. State · filed 2016-11-17

Without deciding upon the merits of any claims raised in the documents submitted in this matter, we decline to exercise our original jurisdiction. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170. A challenge to the validity of the judgment of conviction must be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court in the first instance.

Section 34.160 does not provide mandamus as the means to challenge a conviction; that challenge must first be brought through a postconviction habeas petition in district court.

Abara (David) v. State · filed 2016-11-17

A challenge to the validity of the judgment of conviction must be raised in a postconviction petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed in the district court in the first instance.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus directing a district court clerk to file a defendant’s pro se motion to correct an illegal sentence when appointed counsel represents the defendant only in a separate habeas proceeding.

Trzaska (Edward) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2017-03-15

Nothing in the documents presented before this court indicate that the appointment of Ms. Gregory extended beyond the habeas proceedings. Having determined that petitioner is entitled to relief, we ORDER the petition GRANTED AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF THIS COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS instructing the clerk of the district court to file: (1) the response to the State's opposition, (2) the motion to file, hear and determine motion, and (3) the motion to modify and/or correct an illegal sentence, which were received by the clerk of the district court and forwarded to counsel on November 2, 2016.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus only when no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law is available.

Trelease v. State ex rel. Bullock · filed 1972-11-17

Bullock’s right to appeal to the Civil Service Board constituted a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law which he should have pursued. Only in the absence of such a remedy is the issuance of a writ of mandamus permissible.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief when an appeal provides a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy.

Caruso v. Dist. Ct. (Maize) · filed 2014-11-13

Because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy in the form of an appeal from that order, writ relief is not warranted.

Section 34.160 generally precludes mandamus when an appeal provides a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy.

Golightly & Vannah, Pllc v. Dist. Ct. (Renown Reg'l. Med. Ctr.) · filed 2015-04-21

Because the right to appeal is generally a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief, NRS 34.160; NRS 34.330; Int? Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008), we decline to consider this writ petition.

An available appeal is a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy that precludes writ relief.

Golightly & Vannah, Pllc v. Dist. Ct. (Renown Reg'l. Med. Ctr.) · filed 2015-05-20

Because the right to appeal is a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief, NRS 34.160; NRS 34.330; Int? Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008), we decline to consider this writ petition.

Section 34.160 permits discretionary mandamus relief despite other legal remedies when the petitioner is clearly entitled to dismissal, continued prosecution would cause a miscarriage of justice, and judicial economy favors relief.

Joiner (Emerson) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2017-02-17

While Joiner has other legal remedies, we exercise our ... discretion to issue a writ of mandamus because Joiner is clearly entitled to dismissal of the charge such that his continued prosecution would result in a miscarriage of justice and judicial economy militates in favor of mandamus relief, see NRS 34.160; McNeill, 132 Nev., Adv. Op. 54, 375 P.3d at 1026; State v. Babayan, 106 Nev. 155, 175-76, 787 P.2d 805, 819- 20 (1990).

Section 34.160 generally makes mandamus unavailable when an appeal from final judgment provides an adequate remedy at law.

Nevarez, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Doss) · filed 2022-04-21

Writ relief is generally not available, however, when an adequate and speedy legal remedy exists. ... Here, petitioner has an adequate remedy at law by way of appeal from final judgment.

A writ of mandamus is generally unavailable when an appeal from final judgment provides an adequate legal remedy.

Flaviano, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Neason) · filed 2022-04-21

Writ relief is generally not available, however, when an adequate arid speedy legal remedy exists. ... Here, petitioner has an adequate remedy at law by way of appeal from final judgment.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief when an appeal provides a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.

Stanley (Oscar) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-04-28

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that writ relief is warranted because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy available to him by way of an appeal from the district court's denial of such relief in the first instance.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to vacate a discovery order that exceeds the court’s jurisdiction when disclosure of irrelevant information cannot be remedied on appeal.

Schlatter v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 1977-03-31

Since the disclosure of irrelevant matter is irretrievable once made, Schlatter would effectively be deprived of any remedy from respondent’s erroneous ruling if she was required to disclose the information and then contest the validity of the order on direct appeal. ... Under these circumstances, we consider it proper to grant mandamus, compelling respondent to vacate its improper discovery order.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty, but prohibition is the more appropriate writ to prevent improper discovery.

Wardleigh v. 2ND JUD. DIST. CT. OF STATE · filed 1995-03-22

Moreover, a writ of mandamus may be issued "to compel performance of an act" that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station if there exists no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170. ... We reaffirm, without the necessity of overruling either Clark or Schlatter, that prohibition is a more appropriate remedy for the prevention of improper discovery than mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act, but prohibition is the more appropriate writ to prevent improper discovery.

Wardleigh v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Washoe · filed 1995-03-22

We reaffirm, without the necessity of overruling either Clark or Schlatter, that prohibition is a more appropriate remedy for the prevention of improper discovery than mandamus.

A petitioner must demonstrate that discretionary and extraordinary intervention is warranted to obtain a writ of mandamus.

Scalia v. State Bar · filed 2017-07-25

Because petitioner has otherwise failed to ... demonstrate that our discretionary and extraordinary intervention is warranted, see NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Section 34.160 allows a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required official act or control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

CHASING HORSE (NATHAN) v. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2024-09-26

A writ of mandamus is available "to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station" or to control the manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newrnan, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 permits a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required official act or control arbitrary or capricious discretion.

IN RE: MATTER OF N.R.R. AND N.I.R. · filed 2024-12-05

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion."

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel performance of an act the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station.

SMITH (ARINZA) v. STATE · filed 2024-12-19

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, NRS 34.160, or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 permits a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

NESTER v. DIST. CT. (GAMBLE) · filed 2025-01-30

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel performance of a legally required duty or control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

CLARK CNTY. SCHOOL DIST. v. DIST. CT. (ANGALIA B.) · filed 2025-03-06

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." Segovia v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 133 Nev. 912, 912, 407 P.3d 783, 785 (2017) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to correct a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion when the petitioner lacks an adequate and speedy legal remedy.

STATE v. DIST. CT. (BANKHEAD) (CRIMINAL) · filed 2025-08-21

A writ of mandamus may issue to correct a manifest abuse of or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, when petitioner has no adequate and speedy remedy at law.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel performance of an act that the law specifically requires as a duty arising from an office.

DESTIN v. DIST. CT. (HANDWERKER-LAMASTER) (CHILD CUSTODY) · filed 2025-08-28

Mandamus may issue "to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office." NRS 34.160; see Nev. Const. art. 6, § 4.

Section 34.160 permits a court to issue mandamus to compel performance of a legally required act or control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

CLARK CNTY. SCHOOL DIST. v. DIST. CT. (ANGALIA B.) · filed 2025-11-26

We may issue a writ of mandamus -to compel the performance of an act that the law requires" or to control a district court's "arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3c1 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 permits a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required act or address a manifest, arbitrary, or capricious abuse of discretion.

FIELD EFFECT SEC. INC. v. DIST. CT. (ANDERSON) (CIVIL) · filed 2025-12-04

"[We] may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or where discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously."

Section 34.160 allows a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

RENOWN REGIONAL MED. CENTER v. DIST. CT. (FREEMAN) (CIVIL) · filed 2025-12-11

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act required as an official duty or when discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. DIST. CT. (DOE 1 TRUST) (CIVIL) · filed 2025-12-23

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or where discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

BURNS (GREGORY) v. DIST. CT. (DOE) (CIVIL) · filed 2026-01-29

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

POWERS v. DIST. CT. (BUENO) (CIVIL) · filed 2026-05-14

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits the Nevada Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus when a lower court has manifestly abused its discretion.

Causey (Kasie) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2026-06-18

“This court may issue a writ of mandamus . . . where discretion has been manifestly abused . . . .”

Section 34.160 authorizes mandamus to compel an act required by law as an official duty or to control a manifest, arbitrary, or capricious exercise of discretion.

Salazar (Antonio) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-11-16

Traditionally, a writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.1 NRS 34.160; Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required official act or correct a manifest abuse of discretion, but it cannot compel a court to dismiss charges when dismissal was neither requested below nor required on the court’s own initiative.

Chittenden v. Just. Ct. of Pahrump Twp. · filed 2024-01-25

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, NRS 34.160, or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill, 97 Nev. at 603-04, 637 P.2d at 536. ... The district court in this case could not have properly compelled the justice court to grant Chittenden's request for dismissal because Chittenden neither requested dismissal in the justice court in the first instance, nor was the justice court required to dismiss her case sua sponte.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a district court to perform a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Jdd, Llc v. Dist. Ct. (Item 9 Labs Corp.) · filed 2022-05-13

A writ of mandamus is available to compel a district court to perform an act the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 allows a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

IN RE: MATTER OF J.B. · filed 2024-06-13

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 authorizes discretionary and extraordinary intervention by writ of mandamus.

Garvey, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (Schwartz) · filed 2022-05-12

After considering petitioner's arguments and supporting documents, we conclude that the issues raised do not merit our discretionary and extraordinary intervention at this time. NRS 34.160; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224-25, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004).

Section 34.160 authorizes mandamus to compel a legally required official duty or control a manifest, arbitrary, or capricious exercise of discretion.

State v. Dist. Ct. (Plumlee (Jennifer)) C/W 82249 · filed 2022-05-19

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Hong v. Dist. Ct. (Lynn) · filed 2022-06-01

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." Int'l Gctme Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); see NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required official act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Helfrich (Peter) v. The Fifth Judicial Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-06-17

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act required by law as a duty of an office, trust, or station.

CEGAVSKE v. HOLLOWOOD (BALLOT ISSUE) · filed 2022-06-28

As the law compels the Secretary not to place the initiatives’ questions on the ballot, the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a writ of mandamus. NRS 34.160 (providing that a writ of mandamus may seek to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station); see DR Partners v. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs, 116 Nev. 616, 621, 6 P.3d 465, 468 (2000) (reviewing district court’s decision on a writ petition for an abuse of discretion); Lundberg v. Koontz, 82 Nev. 360, 363, 418 P.2d 808, 809 (1966) (“Mandamus is appropriate to prevent improper action by the Secretary of State, as well as to compel him to perform an act which is his duty under the law.”).

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required official act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Mitchell v. The First Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-06-30

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; lnt'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law or control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Aerogrow Int'L, Inc. v. Dist. Ct. (Overbrook Capital Llc) · filed 2022-06-30

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel the performance of an act that th.e law requires or to control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., lhc. v. Second Judicial .Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

TORREMORO v. DIST. CT. (COMPTON) · filed 2022-07-07

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 makes mandamus available to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Artmor Invs., LLC v. Nye County · filed 2022-07-07

Under NRS 34.160, "[a] writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion."

Section 34.160 permits courts to issue writs of mandamus, whose issuance is within the court’s discretion.

Schwiger (Lawrence) v. State, Dep'T Of Corr. · filed 2022-07-13

This court has original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus and the issuance of such extraordinary relief is within this court’s sole discretion. See Nev. Const. art. 6, § 4; NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170: DLR. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 474-75, 168 P.3d 731, 736-37 (2007).

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required official act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Willis Of Ariz., Inc. v. Hakkasan Usa, Inc. C/W 82833 · filed 2022-08-04

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep'T v. Dist. Ct. (Due Diligence Grp., Llc) · filed 2022-08-11

while mandamus is available to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an official duty or control a manifest, arbitrary, or capricious exercise of discretion.

Bonetti (James) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-08-11

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

LVPPA v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-08-18

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 authorizes the court to issue mandamus to compel performance of a duty specially imposed by law on an office, trust, or station.

Edgeworth Family Tr. v. Dist. Ct. (Simon) · filed 2022-09-16

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to correct or otherwise tgcompel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station." NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a district court to perform an act required by law or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Johnston v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-10-06

A writ of mandamus is available to compel a district court to perform an act the law requires or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Ina Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required official duty or control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Madrigal (Norberto) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-10-11

Traditionally, a writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 makes mandamus available to compel an act the law requires as a duty arising from an office, trust, or station.

Bowles (Travis) v. The Second Judicial Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-10-13

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel an official to perform a legally required act.

Am. Civil Liberties Union Of Nev. v. Cty. Of Nye (Ballot Issue) · filed 2022-10-21

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel an official to perform a legally required act.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Pool (Tyler) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-11-15

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires .. . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required official duty or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Kemp (Ezra) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-11-16

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Berquist v. Dist. Ct. (The Las Vegas Philharmonic) · filed 2022-11-16

A writ of mandamus “is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires... or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.”

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an official duty or control a manifest, arbitrary, or capricious exercise of discretion.

Oceja (Anthony) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-11-30

Traditionally, a writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 makes mandamus available to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Brown, Jr. (Robert) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-11-30

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires...or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.” Int? Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); see NRS 34.160. ... Petitioner has not demonstrated that the district court failed to perform an act the law requires or arbitrarily or capriciously abused its discretion, Int'l Game Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558, nor has he demonstrated that the district court acted in excess of its jurisdiction, NRS 34.320.

Section 34.160 permits the Nevada Supreme Court to issue mandamus to compel a legally required act or control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Freeman Expositions, LLC v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2022-12-01

A writ of mandamus may be issued by this court to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a district court's arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel performance of an act required by law as a duty arising from an office, trust, or station.

Middleton (David) v. Dist. Ct. (Warden) (Death Penalty) · filed 2022-12-08

A writ of mandamus is available to control the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, NRS 34.160, or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, Round Hill Gen. Improvement Dist. u. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 authorizes a writ of mandamus to compel an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station.

Clark Cty. Ass'n of Sch. Adm'rs v. CCSD · filed 2023-05-11

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, see NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act that the law specially requires as a duty of an office, trust, or station, when the petitioner has a legal right, the respondent has a duty to act, and no other adequate remedy exists.

State, Dep't of Health v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2023-08-31

A writ of mandamus is available "to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station." NRS 34.160; Walker v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 136 Nev. 678, 679-80, 476 P.3d 1194, 1196 (2020). This court only issues writs of mandamus when (1) the petitioner establishes a legal right to have the act that their petition requests done; (2) the respondent has a duty to perform the requested action; and (3) the petitioner "has no other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy." Walker, 136 Nev. at 680, 476 P.3d at 1196 (internal quotation marks omitted).

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel an act that the law specially requires as a duty of an office, trust, or station, or to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Orbitz Worldwide v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2023-09-28

A writ of mandamus. is available to correct clear error or .an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion when there is ne..other plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy.4 ... 237 (2002) (observing that writ-of-mandamus relief "is available 'to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station,' or to control manifest abuse of discretion" (quoting NRS 34.160)).

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Falconi v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2024-02-15

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion."

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel performance of an act the law requires as a duty resulting from an office.

Tahican, LLC v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2024-03-07

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting frorn an office, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, 1110 Game Tech., Inc. v. Secoml.ludicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 allows a writ of mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

CARDENAS-GARCIA v. DIST. CT. (DEPT. OF FAMILY SERV.) · filed 2024-08-22

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

Section 34.160 authorizes a court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel an act required as an official duty or when discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

AEROGROW INT'L, INC. v. DIST. CT. (RADOFF) · filed 2021-12-09

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or where discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

Section 34.160 does not permit a writ directing the court of appeals to reverse and vacate its denial of proposed jury instructions.

Woods (Donte) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2021-01-14

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus seeking a writ directing the court of appeals to reverse and vacate the "order and/or action" denying petitioner's jury instructions #22 malice aforethought and #23 implied malice in regard to attempted murder. The relief petitioner seeks is not permitted under NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus when the respondent has a clear, present legal duty to act or exercises discretion arbitrarily or capriciously.

Sewall, Jr. (Arthur) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2020-12-04

"A writ of mandamus will issue when the respondent has a clear, present legal duty to act" or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus relief from a district court's evidentiary ruling when the ruling is a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

State Vs. Dist. Ct. (Obermeyer (Mark)) · filed 2021-02-05

And, "[i]n the context of mandamus, this court considers whether the district court's evidentiary ruling was a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of its discretion." Armstrong, 127 Nev. at 931, 267 P.3d at 780; NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel dismissal when clear statutory authority requires the district court to dismiss an action.

Soong, M.D. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Manukyan) · filed 2021-07-12

We therefore conclude that a writ is appropriate in this case because dismissal is warranted as a matter of law and Dr. Soong lacks "an adequate and speedy legal remedy, given the early stages of litigation." Int? Game Tech, Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197-98, 179 P.3d 556, 558-59 (2008) (explaining that this court "will consider petitions denying motions to dismiss when . . . the district court is obligated to dismiss an action pursuant to clear [statutory] authority").

Section 34.160 permits mandamus relief when the petitioner shows that the law compels the requested act.

Rivera (Roberto) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2021-09-16

Petitioner therefore has not shown that the district court was compelled to vacate the misdemeanor conviction so as to warrant mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief may be denied when an imminent evidentiary hearing makes immediate intervention unwarranted.

Johnston (Derek) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2021-10-11

Having reviewed the petition, answer, and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that extraordinary writ relief is appropriate at this time. ... In particular, the evidentiary hearing before which petitioner seeks release is scheduled to take place today, and thus, under these circumstances, we decline to intervene.

NRS 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Choi, M.D. v. Dist. Ct. (N. Vista Hosp., Llc) · filed 2022-01-18

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." Int? Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); see also NRS 34.160.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act required by law or to control a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion; it does not compel a transfer the law does not require.

Floyd (Zane) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-02-24

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station, or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." Cote H. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 36, 39, 175 P.3d 906, 907-08 (2008) (internal quotation marks, footnote, and alterations omitted); see also NRS 34.160. ... Because we conclude that Floyd has not shown that the district court is required as a matter of law to transfer his criminal case and postconviction case(s) to Department 5 of the Eighth Judicial District Court, we ORDER the petition DENIED.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or correct a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, including by directing a district court to hold a necessary evidentiary hearing.

Lee (Michael) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2022-03-11

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty arising from an office, trust. or station, or to control a manifest abuse of or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Accordingly, we grant the petition in part and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to vacate its order denying Lee’s motion to disqualify the district attorney's office and to, before trial, conduct an evidentiary hearing on the matter to determine whether Lee was prejudiced by the inadvertent disclosure of his defense trial strategy.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus relief when the petitioner establishes that the district court manifestly abused its discretion or acted arbitrarily or capriciously.

Shahrokhi v. Dist. Ct. (Burrow) · filed 2022-04-29

We further conclude that mandamus relief is not warranted because petitioner has not shown that the district court manifestly abused its discretion or acted arbitrarily or capriciously.

Section 34.160 permits a court to issue mandamus as an extraordinary remedy subject to the court's discretion.

Fiore v. Dist. Ct. (Estate Of Ben-Kely) · filed 2022-04-29

Having considered petitioners' argument and the supporting documents, we conclude that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is not warranted as to petitioners' request for mandamus relief. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.170; ... Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d. 849, 851 (1991) (observing that issuance of the writ is subject to this court's discretion).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to challenge a district court decision when the requested relief would compel the performance of a legal duty and the district court had jurisdiction over the matter.

Election Integrity Project Of Nev., Llc Vs. Dist. Ct. (Cegavske) · filed 2020-10-07

Based on the nature of the relief requested and the district court's jurisdiction to consider the request for a preliminary injunction, we conclude that a petition for a writ of mandamus, rather than prohibition, is the appropriate means to challenge the district court's decision under these circumstances.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

TEVA PARENTERAL MEDICINES, INC. VS. DIST. CT. (ADAMS) · filed 2021-03-04

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or correct an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

ENDO HEALTH SOLUTIONS, INC. VS. DIST. CT. (CITY OF RENO) · filed 2021-07-29

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Additionally, because we conclude that the district court has misapplied NRS 268.003, mandamus relief is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control a manifest abuse of discretion or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Doraji (Amir) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2021-10-18

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty arising from an office, trust, or station, or to control a manifest abuse of discretion or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to control an abuse of discretion, including a district court’s manifest abuse in applying the rules of civil procedure.

Firststreet For Boomers & Beyond, Inc. v. Dist. Ct. (Ansara) · filed 2022-03-15

A writ of mandamus "is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires . . . or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion." NRS 34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). ... We exercise our discretion to entertain this petition because the district court failed to apply the plain language of the relevant Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure, resulting in a manifest abuse of its discretion in its decision under those rules.

Section 34.160 makes mandamus available to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Lorenzna Vs. Dist. Ct. (Ibarra) · filed 2019-11-04

The writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, while its counterpart, the writ of prohibition, is available to curb an act outside of or in excess of the district courfs jurisdiction.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Lagunas Vs. Dist. Ct. (Ibarra) · filed 2020-02-26

The writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to address constitutional questions about bail procedures when petitioners have no other adequate remedy.

VALDEZ-JIMENEZ (JOSE) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) C/W 76845 · filed 2020-04-09

Furthermore, we conclude that a writ of mandamus is the appropriate vehicle for raising these issues, as petitioners have no other adequate remedy.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control a manifest abuse of discretion or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Melendez (Manuel) Vs. The Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2020-07-13

A writ of mandamus "is available to compel performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an 'office, trust or station' or to control a manifest abuse of, or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of, discretion."

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act required by law or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

STATE, BD. OF PAROLE COMM'RS VS. DIST. CT. (THOMPSON (MARLIN)) · filed 2019-10-24

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Because the district court misapplied the law, we grant the petition.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Shawn (Rick) Vs. The Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2020-02-19

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

MCNAMEE VS. DIST. CT. (BIANCHI) · filed 2019-10-17

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... We conclude this was an arbitrary or capricious exercise of the district court's discretion.

Section 34.160 allows mandamus to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion, but relief is unwarranted without a showing of such conduct.

Sean K. Claggett & Assocs., Llc Vs. Dist. Ct. (Beale Street Blues Co. Las Vegas, Llc) · filed 2019-10-30

Thus, we are not satisfied that this court's intervention by way of an extraordinary writ is warranted because petitioner has not demonstrated that the district court acted arbitrarily or capriciously in denying the motion to disqualify.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or correct a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Butcher (Mark) Vs. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2019-10-31

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty arising from an office, trust, or station, or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Thus, the decision to deny the motion to amend the judgment of conviction was an arbitrary and capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 allows mandamus to correct a district court’s manifest abuse of discretion, including an erroneous denial of pretrial habeas relief.

GATHRITE (DEANDRE) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2019-11-07

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty arising from an office, trust, or station, or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Because the State did not present the grand jury with anything but the suppressed evidence, the district court manifestly abused its discretion in denying the pretrial habeas petition. ... Accordingly, we grant the petition in part and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to vacate its order denying Gathrite's pretrial petition for a writ of habeas corpus and enter an order consistent with this opinion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a district court to perform a legally required act or correct a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Falconi Vs. Dist. Ct. (Alaniz) · filed 2019-11-19

Mandamus is properly requested to compel the district court to perform a legally required act or to correct a manifest abuse or arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

TOLL VS. DIST. CT. (GILMAN) · filed 2019-12-05

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Manning Vs. The Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2020-02-07

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a court to perform an act required by law.

GUZMAN (WILBER) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2020-03-26

A writ of mandamus is available "to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office or where discretion has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously." Redeker v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 122 Nev. 164, 167, 127 P.3d 520, 522 (2006), limited on other grounds by Hidalgo v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 330, 341, 184 P.3d 369, 377 (2008); see NRS 34.160.