### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

GRANITE GAMING GROUP I, LLC D/B/A MERMAIDS CASINO, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; AND GRANITE GAMING GROUP III, LLC D/B/A LA BAYOU CASINO, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, Appellants,
vs. THE FREMONT STREET EXPERIENCE LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; JEFFREY VICTOR, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT OF THE FREMONT STREET EXPERIENCE LLC; GOLDEN GATE CASINO, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; GOLDEN GATE EXPERIENCE, INC., A NEVADA CORPORATION; MARK BRANDENBURG, AN INDIVIDUAL; DROCK GAMING, LLC, D/B/A THE D (F/K/A FITZ AND/OR FITZGERALD'S), A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; GNLV CORP. D/B/A GOLDEN NUGGET HOTEL & CASINO, A NEVADA CORPORATION; FOUR QUEENS, LLC, D/B/A FOUR QUEENS, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; VINTAGE VEGAS GAMING, LLC, D/B/A BINION'S GAMBLING HALL & HOTEL, A NEVADA CORPORATION; CITY OF LAS 

### VEGAS; AND CAROLYN No. 64549


# FILED

APR 1 1 2016

TRACIE K. LINCEmAN CLERFLOF SUPREME COURT BY DEPUTY CLERK

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) I997A ae).GOODMAN, IN HER OFFICIAL

CAPACITY AS MAYOR ONLY AND NOT IN ANY PERSONAL CAPACITY, Respondents.



### ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE

This is an appeal from a district court order denying a motion for a preliminary injunction. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, Judge. A district court has discretion in deciding whether to grant a preliminary injunction and its decision "will be reversed only where the district court abused its discretion or based its decision on an erroneous legal standard or on clearly erroneous findings of fact." 

### Boulder Oaks Cmty. Ass'n v. B & J Andrews Enters., LLC, 125 Nev. 397, 403, 215 P.3d 27, 31(2009) (internal quotations omitted). We affirm.

Appellant Granite Gaming Group (Granite Gaming) is suing respondents in order to prohibit Fremont Street Experience from allowing its casino members to build outdoor permanent bars that encroach onto city land. Granite Gaming filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary, injunction. The district court granted the temporary restraining order, but after an evidentiary hearing, denied the preliminary injunction on the ground that Granite Gaming had not demonstrated a reasonable probability of success on the merits. Granite Gaming appeals.

To obtain a preliminary injunction, the moving party must show that it "enjoys a reasonable probability of success on the merits and that the defendant's conduct, if allowed to continue, will result in irreparable harm for which compensatory damage is an inadequate remedy." 

### Dixon v. Thatcher, 103 Nev. 414, 415, 742 P.2d 1029, 1029

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2
(0) 1947A(1987). "[T]he irreparable harm must be articulated in specific terms by

the issuing order or be sufficiently apparent elsewhere in the record." Dep't of Conservation and Nat. Res., Div. of Water Res. v. Foley, 121 Nev. 77, 80, 109 P.3d 760, 762 (2005).

The district court denied preliminary injunctive relief based on its determination that Granite Gaming did not demonstrate a sufficient probability of success on the merits to warrant an injunction. As respondents note in their answering brief, we do not need to reach the likelihood of success on the merits because Granite Gaming failed to show irreparable harm. See Gelco Corp. v. Coniston Partners, 811 F.2d 414, 418 (8th Cir. 1987) ("The failure to show irreparable harm is, by itself, a sufficient ground upon which to deny a preliminary injunction ...."). Granite Gaming asserts that "[firreparable harm is conclusively presumed where there is a violation of statute involving the use of land." But Granite Gaming cites no legal authority for this assertion and therefore, we will decline to credit it. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987) ("It is appellant's responsibility to present relevant authority and cogent argument; issues not so presented need not be addressed by this court.").

Granite Gaming has made no other arguments nor pointed to any facts showing the threat of irreparable harm. Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Granite Gaming's motion for a preliminary injunction. Accordingly we,

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A 

### eSaitta J.

J. ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.'

Parraguirre

, J

. Hardesty

"The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Justice, is disqualified and did not participate in the decision of this matter.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 4
(C) 1947Acc: Hon. Elizabeth Goff Gonzalez, District Judge Ara H• Shirinian, Settlement Judge The Jimmerson Law Firm, P.0 Lovato Law Firm, P.C. Las Vegas City Attorney Jolley Urga Wirth Woodbury & Little Holland & Hart LLP/Las Vegas Pisanelli Bice, PLLC Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 5

(0) 1947A mem