station or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. NRS
34.160; Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193,
197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). Petitioner bears the burden of
demonstrating that writ relief is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist.
Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228,88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having considered Petitioner's arguments and the documents
before us, we conclude that our intervention by Way of extraordinary relief
is not warranted. Accordingly, we deny the petition. NRAP 21(b)(1);
Smith v Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851
(1991) (issuance of a writ of mandamus is purely discretionary with this
court).
It is so ORDERED.
Gibbons
cc: Hon. Kenneth C. Cory, District Judge
Holley, Driggs, Walch, Puzey & Thompson/Las Vegas
John H. Cotton & Associates, Ltd.
Law Office of Arthur W. Tuverson
E. Brent Bryson
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A .fejp