Cox v. Dist. Ct.

MICHAEL STEVE COX, No. 62079 Petitioner, vs. THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WHITE PINE, Respondent. MICHAEL STEVE COX, No. 62080 Petitioner, vs. THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WHITE PINE, Resnondent. ORDER DENYING WRIT PETITIONS These are seven original proper person petitions for extraordinary relief. The petitions are not consolidated. Having considered these petitions and supporting documents, we conclude that petitioner's arguments lack merit and that our intervention by way of extraordinary relief is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny the petitions. NRAP 21(b)(1); NRAP 21(c). Additionally, as demonstrated by the this order, petitioner has filed numerous meritless proper person petitions in this court seeking extraordinary writ relief and has further filed a number of similarly meritless appeals in this court. See Cox v. McDaniel, Docket No. 60056, Cox v. McDaniel, Docket No. 60151, Cox v. Bannister, Docket No. 60637, Cox v. State, Docket No. 61322. We caution appellant that continued filing of such meritless petitions and appeals may result in restrictions on his ability to file papers in this court in forma pauperis. See Jordan v. State, Dept. of Motor Vehicles & Pub. Safety, 121 Nev. 44, 110 P.3d 30 (2005), SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A KlEEZZI abrogated on other grounds by Buzz Stew, LLC v. City of N. Las Vegas, 124 Nev. 224, 181 P.3d 670 (2008). It is so ORDERED. 1 Hardesty Parraguirre cc: Hon. James Todd Russell, District Judge Michael Steve Cox Attorney General/Carson City Carson City Clerk White Pine County Clerk Eighth District Court Clerk 'In each of these writ petitions, this court has received petitioner's requests for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. We direct the clerk of this court to file the May 17, 2011, and the June 28, 2011, motions in Docket No. 58292; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60404; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60406; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60407; the March 19, 2012, motion in Docket No. 60409; the November 20, 2012, motion in Docket No. 62079; and the November 20, 2012, motion in Docket No. 62080. Because petitioner was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in each of these writ petitions, no action is required on these motions. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A SINEEMEZMMEEMEIN 11EMESEM-11UMMEMEMEEtiaidiEM -