Workman v. Attorney General ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                               In the motion for leave to file a petition for a writ of quo
    warranto, petitioner Rick Workman seeks leave to file such a petition in
    order to challenge the right of real party in interest Arthur "Andy" Hafen
    to continue to serve as the mayor of Henderson. Having considered the
    parties' arguments and the documents before us, we conclude that
    Workman lacks standing to file either a statutory quo warranto action or a
    constitutional petition for a writ of quo warranto, as he has not identified
    any interest that he has in the office of Henderson mayor or in the
    outcome of a quo warranto petition that is distinct from that of the general
    public. See NRS 35.040; NRS 35.050; Lueck v. Teuton, 
    125 Nev. 674
    , 
    219 P.3d 895
    (2009).
    Similarly, in the alternative petition for a writ of mandamus,
    Workman seeks an order requiring respondents Attorney General
    Catherine Cortez Masto and Secretary of State Ross Miller to file a quo
    warranto petition or otherwise take action to remove Hafen from office.
    Again, because Workman has not identified any beneficial interest in the
    outcome of the proceeding apart from any interests that he shares with
    the community at large, we conclude that Workman lacks standing to file
    a petition for a writ of mandamus in this matter.           See NRS 34.170
    (providing that a writ of mandamus shall issue "on the application of the
    party beneficially interested"); Heller v. Legislature, 
    120 Nev. 456
    , 461, 
    93 P.3d 746
    , 750 (2004) ("To demonstrate a beneficial interest sufficient to
    pursue a mandamus action, a party must show a direct and substantial
    interest that falls within the zone of interests to be protected by the legal
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    2
    (0) I947A duet.
    duty asserted.' (quoting Lindelli v. San Anselmo, 
    4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 453
    , 461
    (App. Ct. 2003))). Accordingly, we deny both the motion for leave to file a
    petition for a writ of quo warranto and the alternative petition for a writ of
    mandamus.
    It is so ORDERED.
    C.J.
    Gibbons
    fritc-t                  , J.
    Hardesty
    ah,-4-9kr
    Parraguirre
    Saitta
    CC:   Hardy Law Group
    Pisanelli Bice, PLLC
    Attorney General/Carson City
    Henderson City Attorney
    SUPREME COURT
    OF
    NEVADA
    3
    (0) I947A    meD
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 65716

Filed Date: 11/26/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021