Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.160

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

State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. Vs. Dist. Ct. (Bird) · filed 2020-05-05

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 does not warrant mandamus to compel a district court to file a notice of entry of order when that filing is not required to start the time for a criminal appeal.

Bellon (Robert) Vs. Dist. Ct. (Raman) · filed 2020-06-19

To the extent petitioner contends that the district court was required file a notice of entry of order to trigger the time to file an appeal, he is incorrect. ... Therefore, we conclude that this court's intervention by way of extraordinary writ is not warranted.

A writ of mandamus is unwarranted when the district court did not arbitrarily exercise its discretion in denying disqualification.

Cox Vs. Dist. Ct. (Gilcrease Well Corp.) · filed 2020-06-24

Accordingly, we conclude that our extraordinary intervention is not warranted, as the district court did not arbitrarily exercise its discretion in denying petitioners request for disqualification.

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

Vega (Kenneth) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2019-05-31

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 control a manifest abuse of discretion.

CAMERON, JR. (TIMMIE) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2019-07-18

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse of discretion." Int? Fid. Ins. Co. ex rel. Blackjack Bonding, Inc. v. State, 122 Nev. 39, 42, 126 P.3d 1133, 1134 (2006); see also NRS 34.160. ... Therefore, we conclude that the district court acted arbitrarily and capriciously in increasing Cameron's bail without explaining the good cause shown, and writ relief is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus relief to control a manifest abuse of discretion, including an arbitrary increase in bail.

Cameron, Jr. (Timmie) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2019-04-29

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse of discretion." ... Therefore we conclude that the district court acted arbitrarily and capriciously in increasing Cameron's bail and writ relief is thus warranted.

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

Cameron v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of State · filed 2019-07-18

"A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse of discretion."

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief when the petitioner fails to show that the district court manifestly abused its discretion.

Martz Vs. Dist. Ct. (Switch, Inc.) · filed 2019-09-16

not demonstrated that the district court manifestly abused its discretion such that this court's intervention is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control a manifest abuse of discretion; traditional mandamus requires a showing of clear legal error or arbitrary or capricious abuse of discretion.

Ggp, Inc. v. Dist. Ct. (Zi Beauty, Inc.) · filed 2019-03-22

GGP has not demonstrated the "clear" error of law, see Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344-45, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997), or "arbitrary or capricious" abuse of discretion, Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 122 Nev. 132, 142, 127 P.3d 1088, 1096 (2006), traditionally required for mandamus.

Section 34.160 requires a mandamus petitioner to show that the law clearly compels the writ; an incomplete record can leave that showing unmet.

Mega Metals and Iron v. Dist. Ct. (Chen) · filed 2018-09-14

Without that information, the writ petition does not show that the law clearly compels a writ in petitioners' favor, and petitioners have not shown that writ relief is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus review of a nonappealable child placement order under NRS Chapter 432B.

Philip R. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court of State · filed 2018-05-03

A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means to challenge a placement order entered in a proceeding under NRS Chapter 432B because the order is not appealable.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief when the petitioner identifies no legal authority entitling him to the requested order.

Palmer (Markiece) v. State · filed 2018-03-15

Lastly, we deny Palmer's request for a writ of mandamus directing the district court to retain jurisdiction over the underlying petition so that he can supplement his filings there because of his own errors and poor preparation in litigating this matter. Palmer has failed to show that this court's extraordinary intervention is warranted, as he has not identified any legal authority entitling him to relief.

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

Bhatia, D.O. v. Dist. Ct. (Baxter) · filed 2018-05-09

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. ... As the district court misinterpreted our legal holding in Piroozi and prematurely ruled on the sufficiency of the evidence to be presented at trial when deciding the motion in limine, we conclude that a writ of mandamus directing the district court to vacate its orders is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus when a district court has manifestly abused its discretion.

Nevada Dep't of Corr. v. Dist. Ct. (Dozier (Scott)) C/W 74722 · filed 2018-05-10

Having heard oral argument and considered the documents submitted in this matter, we exercise our discretion to entertain the CCDA's petition for a writ of mandamus and grant it for the reasons explained herein. See NRS 34.160 (explaining when a writ of mandamus may be issued); see also Redeker v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 122 Nev. 164, 167, 127 P.3d 520, 522 (2006) (explaining that "Mins 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"). ... The district court therefore exceeded its authority and manifestly abused its discretion when it considered the challenge.

Section 34.160 ordinarily permits mandamus to compel a judicial act required by law; the court may also consider mandamus to clarify an important legal issue of first impression when judicial economy favors review.

MDC RESTAURANTS, LLC VS. DIST. CT. (DIAZ) · filed 2018-05-31

Generally, mandamus will issue to compel performance of a judicial act that the law requires as a duty resulting from office, see NRS 34.160, when "there is not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law," NRS 34.170. Where, as here, the petitioners instead seek clarification of a legal issue of first impression, mandamus can nonetheless be appropriate when "an important issue of law needs clarification and considerations of sound judicial economy and administration militate in favor of granting the petition." Int? Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197-98, 179 P.3d 556, 559 (2008).

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

Mulkern v. Dist. Ct. (Clark Cty. Dep't of Family Serv.'s) · filed 2018-08-16

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 mandamus to compel a legal duty or correct a manifest abuse of discretion.

3300 Partners, LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Advantage 1, LLC) · filed 2018-01-30

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of a legal duty or to correct a manifest abuse of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel remand for a preliminary examination when the defendant has a clear right to one and the district court has exercised no discretion.

Sturrock v. State · filed 1979-12-20

Because appellant had a clear right to a preliminary examination, and the district court exercised no discretion in failing or refusing to remand to the justice court, NRS 171.208, mandamus was available to compel remand. NRS 34.160.

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

Thompson v. FIRST JUD. DIST. CT., STOREY CTY. · filed 1984-06-26

We initially note that 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. Additionally, we have previously used mandamus to review a district court's action in dismissing an appeal from a justice's court. See Plankinton v. District Court, 93 Nev. 643, 572 P.2d 525 (1977). Accordingly, we will treat the present petition as one for mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required official duty, but the court has discretion to decline writ review of a discovery order.

Clark County Liquor & Gaming Licensing Board v. Clark · filed 1986-12-31

A writ of mandamus may be issued by this court to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station. NRS 34.160. ... Preliminarily, we note that mandamus is an extraordinary remedy and whether a petition will be entertained lies within the discretion of this court. ... The Board has failed to show any circumstances that justify departure from our usual policy of declining to review discovery orders by extraordinary writ.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act required as an official duty or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Choose Life Campaign '90' v. Del Papa · filed 1990-11-28

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.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a duty imposed by law when there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy at law.

State of Nevada Employees Ass'n v. Daines · filed 1992-01-02

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station and where títere is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy at law.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty, but laches can bar the petition.

Building & Construction Trades Council of Northern Nevada v. State Ex Rel. Public Works Board · filed 1992-08-20

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. ... As an extraordinary remedy, a writ of mandamus is subject to the doctrine of laches. ... Applying the test set forth in Buckholt, we hold that the district court properly found that the relief sought by Council's petition was precluded by the doctrine of laches.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion; a reasonable delay in a discretionary act does not warrant a writ.

Brewery Arts Center v. State Board of Examiners · filed 1992-12-11

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Therefore, because the Board has not failed to issue the bonds within a reasonable time and its decision was discretionary, we conclude the Board's vote was an appropriate exercise of discretion which does not warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus.

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

Digesti v. Third Judicial District Court · filed 1993-05-27

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.

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

Levinson v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark · filed 1993-07-29

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. ... The district court erred in refusing to grant petitioners’ motion to expunge the lis pendens, and the Levinsons have no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. We therefore order the Clerk of this court to forthwith issue a writ of mandamus directing the district court to expunge the lis pendens on petitioners’ real property.

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

Sunrise Hospital v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 1994-01-20

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. ... In this case, the district court abused its discretion in granting the Dailey’s petition to perpetuate testimony. Accordingly, we grant this petition.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a duty imposed by law when there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy at law.

STATE OF NEV. EMP. ASS'N v. Daines · filed 1992-01-02

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station and where there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy at law. See NRS 34.160; Choose Life Campaign `90' v. Del Papa, 106 Nev. 802, 801 P.2d 1384 (1990). Accordingly, we grant this petition.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus when a request falls within the traditional scope of that remedy.

Whitehead v. NEVADA COM'N JUDICIAL DIS. · filed 1994-02-18

The theory of this request is within the traditional scope of mandamus as historically recognized and as codified in Nevada law. NRS 34.160 provides: "The writ may he issued by the supreme court, or a judge of the district court, to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station; or 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 by such inferior tribunal, corporation, board or person."

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an official duty without a formal order refusing to perform it.

Whitehead v. Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline · filed 1994-04-22

It is frivolous to contend that the writ is available only to compel a duty “resulting from an office, trust or station,” concerning which the office holder has entered a formal order refusing to perform.

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

Gordon v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 1996-03-01

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, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

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

Aftercare of Clark County v. Justice Court of Las Vegas Township Ex Rel. County of Clark · filed 2004-01-23

Mandamus, rather than prohibition, is the appropriate remedy "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; see also NRS 34.320 (providing that a writ of prohibition is available to stop extra-jurisdictional judicial proceedings).

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or to address a discretionary act when discretion is abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

City of Sparks v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 1996-07-23

Pursuant to NRS 34.160, a writ of mandamus may be issued by this court “to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.” We have also indicated that a writ of mandamus will not lie to control a discretionary act, unless discretion is abused or is exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

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

Lewis v. Second Judicial District Court · filed 1997-01-04

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.

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

County of Clark v. Doumani · filed 1998-01-22

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.

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

Widdis v. Second Judicial District Court of Nevada Ex Rel. County of Washoe · filed 1998-12-09

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, pursuant to NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

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

Burgess v. Storey County Board of Commissioners · filed 2000-02-02

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. ... We reverse and remand this case to the district court so that it may issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Board to reinstate Burgess’s brothel license.

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

State v. Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada · filed 2000-02-02

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.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel performance of a duty required by law.

State v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2000-03-13

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, NRS 34.160, 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.

State v. Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada · filed 2000-03-13

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, NRS 34.160, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

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

Kindred v. Second Judicial District Court of Nevada · filed 2000-04-05

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 an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. ... Accordingly, we conclude that extraordinary relief is not warranted in this case because the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that both Kindred’s Title VII and FMLA claims are arbitrable.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty; it reaches a discretionary decision only when discretion is manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

State v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2000-11-02

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station. See NRS 34.160. ... Because the State seeks to compel the district court to allow the filing of the notices of intent to seek the death penalty, we treat the State's petition as one for mandamus relief. "Mandamus will not lie to control discretionary action, unless discretion is manifestly abused or is exercised arbitrarily or capriciously."

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel performance of a legally required duty, including a request to compel a district court to allow a filing.

State v. Second Judicial District Court ex rel. County of Washoe · filed 2000-11-02

A writ of mandamus may issue to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station. See NRS 34.160. ... Because the State seeks to compel the district court to allow the filing of the notices of intent to seek the death penalty, we treat the State’s petition as one for mandamus relief.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty, but a writ cannot compel discharge from an interpleader action while issues concerning the attorney’s lien remain unresolved.

Michel v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 2001-02-22

An extraordinary writ may issue to arrest the proceedings of the district court when such proceedings exceed the district court’s jurisdiction or to compel the court to perform an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station. See NRS 34.320 (writ of prohibition); NRS 34.160 (writ of mandamus). ... Nevertheless, because certain issues remain unresolved regarding the enforcement of Michel’s lien, we decline to issue the extraordinary relief requested.

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

Mosley v. Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline · filed 2001-05-17

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, [11] or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an act required by law or to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

State v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 2002-03-13

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 manifest abuse of discretion.

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

Nava v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 2002-05-17

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

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

Burch v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 2002-07-17

When there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law, a writ of mandamus is available to compel the district court to perform a required act, or to control an arbitrary or capricious abuse of discretion.

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

Leibowitz v. EIGHTH JUD. DISTRICT COURT · filed 2003-11-03

The writ is generally issued "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.

Dangberg Holdings Nevada, L.L.C. v. Douglas County · filed 1999-06-07

A writ of mandamus may be granted to compel the performance of an act which 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.

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

Burch v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2002-07-17

When there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law, a writ of mandamus is available to compel the district court to perform a required act, or to control an arbitrary or capricious abuse of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits an original mandamus proceeding to challenge the Secretary of State’s performance of a duty arising from office.

Redl v. Secretary of State · filed 2004-03-12

Reinstatement and revival of a corporate charter are duties resulting from the office of the Secretary of State; ... and as discussed below, the Secretary of State has discretion to accept applications for revival that substantially comply with pertinent statutory provisions. Moreover, Redi has no adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law to challenge the Secretary of State’s decision. It therefore appears that an original writ proceeding is the appropriate method for challenging the Secretary of State’s decision.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control a manifest abuse of discretion; mandamus is generally available to challenge orders in ancillary bail bond proceedings.

International Fidelity Insurance Co. ex rel. Blackjack Bonding, Inc. v. State · filed 2006-02-02

Generally, a petition for a writ of mandamus will be the appropriate vehicle for challenging an order entered in an ancillary bail bond proceeding. A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

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

Clark County District Attorney v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 2007-09-20

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 control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Walker v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2004-12-09

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. ... Accordingly, we grant the petition and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to vacate its order granting the State's motion to unseal Walker's criminal records.

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

Gumm Ex Rel. Gumm v. Nevada Department of Education · filed 2005-06-23

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

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to address an important legal issue when judicial economy and justice favor intervention.

Bennett v. Eighth Judicial District Court of Nevada Ex Rel. County of Clark · filed 2005-10-20

We conclude that this matter raises an important issue of law and that the interests of judicial economy and justice soundly militate in favor of. granting Bennett’s petition.

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

Redeker v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2006-02-09

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. ... We conclude that mandamus relief is warranted and grant the petition in part.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a duty required by law or to remedy discretion that has been manifestly abused or exercised arbitrarily or capriciously.

Redeker v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark · filed 2006-02-09

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

Maria L. v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada · filed 2006-03-16

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

Millen v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2006-12-21

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 an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act; a single petition cannot combine unrelated demands for different officials to take different actions.

OUR NEV. JUDGES, INC. v. DIST. CT. (THE DOE 1 TRUST) (CIVIL) · filed 2026-02-26

Filing a single petition here detracts from the purpose of the writ—to compel performance of an act that the law enjoins—as the district court’s decisions regarding confidentiality and sealing of civil proceedings will necessarily differ by case type and Our Nevada Judges argues different actions are required of the different judges and clerks below. See NRS 34.160: cf. Morneault v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., No. 83580, 2021 WL 4947888, *1 (Oct. 22, 2021) (declining to join writ petitions where the petitioners sought different rehef).

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

Millen v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark · filed 2006-12-21

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 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.

Nevada Yellow Cab Corp. v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 2007-03-08

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 a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Caballero v. Seventh Judicial District Court · filed 2007-09-20

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse or 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.

CLARK COUNTY DIST. ATTY. v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2007-09-20

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. ... As the district court was compelled to apply these standards, we grant the petition and instruct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus that directs the district court to vacate its placement order and to consider the facts and circumstances concerning the present placement in reaching a determination of the child's best interest in obtaining a permanent home.

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

OWNERS'ASS'N v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2007-09-20

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" [11] or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

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

COTE H. v. Dist. Ct. · filed 2008-01-31

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," [4] or to control a manifest abuse or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Johanson v. Eighth Judicial District Court · filed 2008-05-01

Accordingly, as mandamus is available to compel an act that the law requires and to control a manifest abuse of discretion, we grant the petition for a writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Halverson v. Miller · filed 2008-07-03

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires or to control a manifest abuse of discretion.

Section 34.160 permits a writ of mandamus to compel a district court to correct a sentence imposed under the wrong law.

State v. SECOND JUDICIAL DIST. CT.(PULLIN) · filed 2008-07-24

“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.” ... The clerk of this court shall issue a writ of mandamus instructing the district court to conduct a new sentencing hearing consistent with this opinion.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required act or control a manifest abuse of discretion.

ANSE, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark · filed 2008-09-25

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires, or to control a manifest abuse of discretion. ... Accordingly, the district court did not manifestly abuse its discretion when it denied partial summary judgment to petitioners.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to remedy a lower tribunal’s arbitrary exercise of discretion.

Village League to Save Incline Assets, Inc. v. State ex rel. Board of Equalization · filed 2008-10-30

We grant the Taxpayers’ petition with respect to their alternative request for a writ of mandamus, however, because they demonstrated that they are without other adequate legal remedy and that the State Board arbitrarily exercised its discretion.

A writ of mandamus may issue to clarify an important issue of law when extraordinary intervention is warranted.

State v. Second Judicial District Court · filed 2005-08-11

This court may issue a writ of mandamus to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station; control a manifest abuse of discretion; or clarify an important issue of law. ... Further, this petition raises an important issue of law which requires clarification: whether a district court has discretion to credit time spent on house arrest towards a prison sentence. Therefore, we conclude that this court’s intervention by way of extraordinary writ is warranted.

Section 34.160 limits mandamus relief to compelling a legally required act or controlling an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Kay v. Nunez · filed 2006-11-22

Additionally, even if the district court exercises its discretion and considers a petition for mandamus relief, it should grant such relief only 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 review of a district court’s evidentiary ruling for manifest abuse of discretion or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

State v. Eighth Judicial District Court ex rel. County of Clark · filed 2011-12-29

In 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.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legal duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion; the court may consider a challenge to an evidentiary ruling in narrow circumstances.

Williams v. Eighth Judicial District Court Ex Rel. County of Clark · filed 2011-07-28

We conclude that an exception to our normal rule rejecting writ petitions challenging evidentiary rulings is necessary in this matter, and we exercise our discretion to consider these writ petitions.

Section 34.160 requires a mandamus petitioner to name the party legally responsible for the requested action; naming the wrong respondent requires denial of the writ.

Brooks v. Legislature of the State of Nevada · filed 2013-03-28

Mandamus issues to direct a named respondent to take legally required action. NRS 34.160. For the writ to issue, the proper party respondent must be named. Secretary of State 120 Nev. at 462-63, 93 P.3d at 750. Petitioner's failure to name the correct respondent is a defect that, with no response by petitioner to suggest a basis to distinguish our existing caselaw, requires denial of the writ. See id.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief to compel the filing of a petition that the district court has already filed.

Gibbons v. Grierson · filed 2013-09-20

Having considered the petition, the answer, and the attached documents, we conclude that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is not warranted as it appears that petitioner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus has, in fact, been filed by the district court. See NRS 34.160; Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844.

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

Clay v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2013-07-11

A writ of mandamus may issue 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. Improvement Dist. v. Newman, 97 Nev. 601, 603-04, 637 P.2d 534, 536 (1981).

Section 34.160 allows the court to exercise discretion in deciding whether to consider a mandamus petition.

City of Las Vegas v. Dist. Ct. Crowder (Ryan) · filed 2015-09-10

Under the circumstances discussed below, we elect to exercise our discretion and consider the petition.

Section 34.160 permits the court to entertain a mandamus petition that raises an important legal issue when resolving it would promote judicial economy, even if an appeal appears adequate.

TAM, M.D. VS. DIST. CT. (CORNELL) · filed 2015-10-01

In this case, although an appeal from a final judgment appears to be an adequate and speedy remedy for the individual parties, resolving this writ petition could affect the course of the litigation and thus promote sound judicial economy and administration. Moreover, this petition raises an important legal issue in need of clarification involving public policy, which could resolve or mitigate related or future litigation. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to entertain Dr. Tam's petition for writ of mandamus.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus review of a denied motion to dismiss when no factual dispute exists and clear authority obligates dismissal.

Nev. Checker Cab Corp. v. Dist. Ct. (Ferentz) · filed 2016-02-03

We elect to entertain the petition for a writ of mandamus in this case because no factual dispute exists and because there is clear authority obligating the district court to dismiss the action.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel a legally required duty or control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion; the court may decline writ review of a denied motion to dismiss when the grounds for dismissal are unclear.

S. Nev. Adult Mental Health Serv.'s v. Dist. Ct. (Brown) · filed 2016-05-19

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." NRS 34.160. ... Under the first prong of the test, we decline to consider this writ petition.

Section 34.160 does not warrant mandamus relief when the petitioner has not shown that the challenged decision was an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Whipple, Esq. v. State · filed 2016-06-23

Petitioner has not demonstrated that the hearing panel's decision was in excess of its jurisdiction or constituted ... an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008).

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

Blandino v. Dist. Ct. (City of Las Vegas) · filed 2016-06-16

"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." ... We conclude that Blanclino has not demonstrated that he is entitled to extraordinary relief.

Section 34.160 permits mandamus to compel an inferior tribunal, so it does not provide a writ directing the issuing court to accept a filing.

O'Keefe (Brian) v. the Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct. · filed 2016-12-15

We deny the petition as this relief is improperly sought in this matter. See NRS 34.160 (providing that writ lies to compel performance by an inferior tribunal).

A petitioner seeking mandamus bears the burden of showing that extraordinary, discretionary intervention is warranted.

Westbourne Capital, LLC v. Dist. Ct. (Redwood Recovery Serv.'s, LLC) · filed 2017-01-12

This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging various pretrial district court orders. Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that petitioners have met their burden to demonstrate that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted.

A petitioner seeking mandamus must demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted.

Carr (Stephen) v. Dist. Ct. (State) · filed 2017-02-16

Having considered the petition and appendix filed in this matter, we conclude that petitioner fails to demonstrate that extraordinary relief is warranted.

Section 34.160 permits denial of mandamus relief when the court finds extraordinary, discretionary intervention unwarranted.

Allen v. the Nevada Bd. of Parole Comm'rs · filed 2017-02-16

Having considered the petition, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted.

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

Bohannon v. Dist. Ct. (Bohannon) · filed 2017-03-21

A writ of mandamus may issue 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 or manifest abuse of discretion. NRS 34.160.

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

STATE, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GEN. VS. JUSTICE CT. (ESCALANTE) · filed 2017-04-06

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.

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

A.J. VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2017-06-01

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. ... Therefore, we conclude that A.J. was entitled to protections afforded under NRS 62C.240, and the juvenile court arbitrarily and capriciously abused its discretion by adjudicating her as a delinquent.

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

THOMAS (LACY) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE) · filed 2017-09-14

"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." Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008); NRS 34.160.

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

STATE, DEP'T. OF TRANSP. VS. DIST. CT. (NASSIRI) · filed 2017-09-27

"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." ... Moreover, pursuant to clear authority, the district court is obligated to dismiss the claims against NDOT. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to address NDOT's petition.

Section 34.160 does not permit a mandamus petition in district court to seek resolution of a pending postconviction habeas petition there.

Howard (Abdul) v. State · filed 2017-09-13

Based upon our review of the record on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying the petition because a petition for a writ of mandamus is the improper vehicle for requesting such relief in the district court.

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

HIGH NOON AT ARLINGTON RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASS'N VS. DIST. CT. (D.R. HORTON, INC.) · filed 2017-09-27

"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 does not provide mandamus to challenge a district court’s jurisdiction to order parties to sell property; prohibition is the appropriate writ.

Hillman v. Dist. Ct. (Proctor) · filed 2018-12-13

The petition primarily takes issue with whether the district court had jurisdiction to order the parties to sell the apartment. As such, the appropriate writ is for prohibition, not mandamus. Compare NRS 34.160 (scope of mandamus), with NRS 34.320 (scope of prohibition).

Section 34.160 generally does not permit mandamus review of a district court acting in its appellate capacity absent a refusal or excess of jurisdiction or an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion.

Solano (Roberto) v. Dist. Ct. (The City of Las Vegas) · filed 2016-05-09

We conclude that petitioner fails to demonstrate an exception to our general rule, as he fails to demonstrate the district court "improperly refused to exercise its jurisdiction, . . . exceeded its jurisdiction, or . . . exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner."