Cole (Melissa) v. Dist. Ct. (State)

 126 (2012) (recognizing that an extraordinary writ petition was an
appropriate vehicle to challenge an order that dismissed a petition
alleging abuse and neglect). It is petitioner's burden to demonstrate that
our extraordinary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist.
Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
We have considered the petition, the answer, and the reply.
Although the abuse and neglect petition was not filed within ten days
after the protective custody hearing, the child was returned to his
mother's care the day after the protective custody hearing. Under these
circumstances, we conclude that our intervention by way of extraordinary
relief is not warranted. See Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev.
674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (stating that the issuance of an
extraordinary writ is purely discretionary with this court). 1 Accordingly,
we
ORDER the petition DENIED. 2

Hardesty

Parraguirre '44 - Cherry

'We take judicial notice that NRS 432B.490 wa substantively
amended on May 24, 2013. See A.B. 174, 77th Leg. (Nev. 2013).

2 Inlight of our decision in this matter, we deny petitioner's motion
for a stay, and we vacate the temporary stay imposed by our February 8,
2013, order. We further deny petitioner's motion to strike the answer.

SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A
 cc: Hon. Robert Teuton, District Judge, Family Court Division
Special Public Defender
Attorney General/Carson City
Clark County District Attorney/Juvenile Division
Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA

(0) 1947A