Nev. Rev. Stat. » NRS: CHAPTER 34 - WRITS; PETITION TO ESTABLISH FACTUAL INNOCENCE
Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 34.170 (2026)

Writ to issue when no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in law

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
NRS 34.170  Writ to issue when no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in law.  This writ shall be issued in all cases where there is not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. It shall be issued upon affidavit, on the application of the party beneficially interested.

      [1911 CPA § 754; RL § 5696; NCL § 9243]

     

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 785 cases (157 in the last 5 years), 1961–2026 · leading case: Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. Cnty. of Clark, 88 P.3d 840 (Nev. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. Cnty. of Clark, 88 P.3d 840 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 3× “DISCUSSION Under NRS 34.170, a writ of mandamus is proper only when there is no plain, adequate and speedy legal remedy.”
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Dist. Ct., 2022 NV 55 (Nev. 2022). · cites it 8× “379, 384 (1953)), writ relief is not appropriate where there is a “plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law,” NRS 34.170, such as the right to appeal from a final judgment, Archon Corp.”
Pan v. Dist. Ct., 88 P.3d 840 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 3× “DISCUSSION Under NRS 34.170, a writ of mandamus is proper only when there is no plain, adequate and speedy legal remedy.”
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court, 179 P.3d 556 (Nev. 2008). “NRS 34.170; D.R. Horton v. Dist. Ct., 123 Nev.”
Burch v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 49 P.3d 647 (Nev. 2002). · cites it 2× “We, therefore, grant the petition and direct the clerk of this court to issue a writ of mandamus directing the district court to vacate its order compelling arbitration.”
Shoen Vs. State Bar of Nevada, 2020 NV 30 (Nev. 2020). · cites it 4× “160, when "there is not a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law," NRS 34.170. But whether to do so in a particular case is entirely within this court's discretion.”
Int'l Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Washoe, 127 P.3d 1088 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 2× “120 grants authority only to the Attorney General to move to dismiss a false claims action. As the Attorney General has since joined the petition, and as it is IGT that will be affected if the district court proceeds with the FCA action and IGT's taxpayer rights that will…”
Gen. Motors Corp. v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 134 P.3d 111 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 2× “[5] NRS 34.170. [6] Cheung v. Dist. Ct., 121 Nev.”
State v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court ex rel. Cnty. of Clark, 267 P.3d 777 (Nev. 2011). “NRS 34.170. Ultimately, the decision to entertain an extraordinary writ petition lies within our discretion, and we must “consider[ ] whether judicial economy and sound judicial administration militate for or against issuing the writ,” Redeker v.”
Sec'y of State v. STATE LEGISLATURE, 93 P.3d 746 (Nev. 2004). · cites it 2× “3 NRS 34.170. State courts are not bound by federal standing principles, which derive from the “case or controversy” component of the United States Constitution.”
Marquis & Aurbach v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court Ex Rel. Cnty. of Clark, 146 P.3d 1130 (Nev. 2006). · cites it 2× “[9] We note that the provisions of NRS Chapter 38 providing for appeals to the Supreme Court from certain orders entered by a district court reviewing a Chapter 38 arbitration proceeding do not apply to orders entered by a district court reviewing, de novo, a decision of the fee…”
Smith v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Court, 818 P.2d 849 (Nev. 1991). “See NRS 34.320; NRS 34.330. Mandamus is a proper remedy to compel performance of a judicial act when there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy at law in order to compel the performance of an act which the law requires as a duty resulting from office.”
Show all 785 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.