relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228,
88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having considered the writ petition and appendices, we
conclude that the district court did not arbitrarily exercise its discretion in
striking petitioners' witnesses and permitting petitioners to procure new
witnesses, and petitioners have failed to otherwise demonstrate that the
law compels relief in their favor. Id.; Int'l Game Tech, Inc., 124 Nev. at
197; 179 P.3d at 558. We therefore decline to grant this petition for
extraordinary relief. NRAP 21(b)(1); Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844;
Smith, 107 Nev. at 679; 818 P.2d at 853. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.'
L Rf act ria.
Saitta
J.
cc: Hon. Kenneth C. Cory, District Judge
Carroll, Kelly, Trotter, Franzen, & McKenna
Rogers, Mastrangelo, Carvalho & Mitchell, Ltd.
Eighth District Court Clerk
'The stay imposed by our November 20, 2014, order is hereby
vacated.
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A .434.