Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Nevada Supreme Court

Court

Nevada Supreme Court

Nevada

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2025-05-14
Status Disposition Filed/Case Closed
Type Original Proceeding Criminal Mandamus
Docket 16 entries
Disposition dismissed

Docket Entries

  1. Filed Order/Voluntary Dismissal. In response to this court's order to show cause why this writ petition should not be dismissed as moot, petitioner indicates that he withdraws the petition. We construe petitioner's response as a motion to voluntarily dismiss under NRAP 42 and grant the motion. "This writ proceeding is thus dismissed." Case Closed/No Remittitur Issued. B25-KP/EC/PL (SC)
  2. Filed Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (SC)
  3. Filed Appendix to Petition for Writ of Mandamus - Index. (SC)
  4. Filed Appendix to Petition for Writ of Mandamus - Volume I of IV. (SC)
  5. Filed Appendix to Petition for Writ of Mandamus - Volume II of IV. (SC)
  6. Filed Appendix to Petition for Writ of Mandamus - Volume III of IV. (SC)
  7. Filed Appendix to Petition for Writ of Mandamus - Volume IV of IV. (SC)
  8. Issued Notice of Mandatory Electronic Filing. All attorneys are required to file electronically. To: Christopher Hamner and Kenneth Portz. (SC)
  9. Filed Petitioner's Proof of Service for Petition for Writ of Mandamus, Index and Appendix. (SC)
  10. Filed Real Party in Interest Notice of Appearance for Ann Dunn. (SC)
  11. Filed Petitioner's Emergency Motion Under NRAP 27(E) to Stay District Court Proceedings Pending Consideration of Petition For Writ of Mandamus. (SC)
  12. Filed Real Party in Interest Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Christopher Hamner. (SC)
  13. Filed Real Party in Interest Motion to Withdraw as Counsel of Record for Kenneth Portz. (SC)
  14. Filed Order to Show Cause. Petitioner has filed an emergency motion for stay of the district court proceedings, asserting that a hearing on several motions is scheduled before the judge on Monday, June 2. The district court online docket entries show that on May 28, 2025, a plea was entered and a guilty plea agreement and amended indictment were filed. As a result, emergency relief ostensibly is no longer needed. Further, it is unclear whether this writ petition continues to present a justiciable controversy. Accordingly, petitioner shall have until 5 p.m. today, May 29, 2025, to show cause why this writ petition should not be dismissed as moot. Real party in interest shall have until 5 p.m. tomorrow, May 30, 2025, to file and serve any reply. fn1[The motions to withdraw as counsel filed by Christopher S. Hamner and Kenneth N. Portz are granted, NRAP 46(d)(3)(A); the clerk of this court shall remove those attorneys as counsel for real party in interest.] (SC)
  15. Filed Petitioner's Response to Order to Show Cause. (SC)
  16. Filed Real Party in Interest Notice of No Reply to Order to Show Cause. (SC)

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more