ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a district court order denying a motion for summary judgment in a medical malpractice action.
As a general rule, “judicial economy and sound judicial administration militate against the utilization of mandamus petitions to review orders denying motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment.” State ex rel. Dept of Transp. v. Thompson, 99 Nev. 358, 362, 662 P.2d 1338, 1340 (1983). Although the rule is not absolute, petitioners have not established that an eventual appeal does not afford them an adequate legal remedy. NRS 34.170; Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 225, 88 P.3d 840, 841 (2004) (“[E]even if an appeal is not immediately available because the challenged order is interlocutory in nature, the fact that the order may ultimately be challenged on appeal from the final judgment generally precludes writ relief.”). We conclude that interlocutory review by extraordinary writ is not warranted in this case. Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Parraguirre, C.J.
Hardesty, J.
Stiglich, J.