ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges a district court order denying a motion to dismiss in a declaratory relief action.
Having considered the petition and the supporting documents, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. Pori v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to grant relief). Subject to very few exceptions, we generally decline to exercise our discretion to entertain writ petitions seeking interlocutory review of a district court order denying dismissal of a complaint. Endo Health Sols., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 137 Nev. 390, 392, 492 P.3d 565, 568 (2021). We decline to deviate from that rule here, particularly because the issue presented can be raised on appeal from a final judgment, such that petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy. NRS 34.170; Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841 (providing that an appeal is an adequate legal remedy precluding writ relief). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Stiglich, J.
Pickering, J.
Parraguirre, J.