when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law. Pan v.
Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 224, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004).
Having considered petitioner's arguments and the documents
before this court, we conclude that extraordinary writ relief is not
warranted. NRS 34.160; NRS 34.320; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at
851; see also NRAP 21(b). In particular, petitioner is challenging an order,
entered on remand from this court, in which the district court finally
established child custody. Because petitioner has a plain, speedy, and
adequate legal remedy in the form of an appeal from that order, writ relief
is not warranted. Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (explaining that an
appeal is an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief); see also NRAP
3A(b)(7) (providing that an order finally establishing or modifying child
custody is appealable). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
J.
Hardesty
iP7/4 J.
Douglas
,J.
Cherry
cc: Hon. Cynthia Dianne Steel, District Judge, Family Court Division
F. Peter James
Sterling Law, LLC
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1 ,147A are