court's jurisdiction. See NRS 34.320; Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court,
107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Writ relief is typically not
available, however, when the petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy at law. See NRS 34.020; NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; Int'l Game
Tech., 124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558; Las Vegas Police Prot. Ass'n, 122
Nev. at 241, 130 P.3d at 190. Generally, an appeal is an adequate legal
remedy precluding writ relief. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120
Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004).
Here, petitioner does not dispute that it will be able to appeal
the challenged order once a final judgment is entered below, but instead
contends that the appeal is not an adequate remedy because it is
uncertain when a final judgment will be entered. If, however, all of the
claims against petitioner have been resolved and severance from the
remaining defendants is appropriate, petitioner may seek relief from the
district court under NRCP 54(b). That rule allows a district court to direct
the entry of final judgment as to a party in order to allow it to proceed
with an appeal. NRAP 54(b). And even if severance is not appropriate,
petitioner's remedy will be in the form of an appeal from the final
judgment. Regardless, because petitioner has an adequate legal remedy,
we deny the petition. See NRAP 21(b)(1); NRAP 21(c); Int'l Game Tech.,
124 Nev. at 197, 179 P.3d at 558; Las Vegas Police Prot. Ass'n, 122 Nev. at
241, 130 P.3d at 190; Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841.
It is so ORDERED.
J.
Hardesty
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
P C0.4)t
Parraguirre
2
J.
(0) 1947A
MERSERIBESSEAMIKEM
cc: Hon. Mark R. Denton, District Judge
Peel Brimley LLP/Seattle
Peel Brimley LLP/Henderson
Aldrich Law Firm, Ltd.
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) 1947A