ORDER DENYING PETITION
This original petition for a writ of mandamus challenges an amended district court order adjudicating an attorney lien. Having considered the petition, answer, reply, and supporting documentation, we are not persuaded that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted as the petitioners have an adequate remedy at law by way of their pending appeal. See Walker v. Second Jud. Dist. Ct., 136 Nev. 678, 683, 476 P.3d 1194, 1198 (2020) (declining to grant writ relief when a later appeal was available); Pan v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 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 Jud. Dist. Ct., 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 entertain a writ petition). We therefore
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Cadish, C.J.
Stiglich, J.
Parraguirre, J.