Brennan v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department ( 2021 )

1 LYSSA S. ANDERSON Nevada Bar No. 5781 2 RYAN W. DANIELS Nevada Bar No. 13094 3 KAEMPFER CROWELL 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 650 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 792-7000 5 Fax: (702) 796-7181 landerson@kcnvlaw.com 6 rdaniels@kcnvlaw.com 7 Attorneys for Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 HELEN BRENNAN, individually, CASE NO.: 2:20-cv-00662-RFB-DJA 11 Plaintiff, 12 vs. STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE 13 STATE OF NEVADA ex rel LAS VEGAS (Second Request) METROPOLITAN POLICE 14 DEPARTMENT, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; STATE OF NEVADA 15 ex rel NEVADA HIGHWAY PATROL, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; 16 TROOPER L. McCOLL, p#352, an individual employed by the STATE OF 17 NEVADA ex rel NEVADA HIGHWAY PATROL, a political subdivision of the State 18 of Nevada; DOE OFFICERS I through XX, employed by STATE OF NEVADA ex rel ex 19 rel LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, a political 20 subdivision of the State of Nevada; DOES I through X; and ROE Business Entities I 21 through X; inclusive, 22 Defendants. 23 Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, Defendant, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 24 1 (“LVMPD”) and Plaintiff, Helen Brennan (“Plaintiff”) by and through their respective counsel, 2 hereby stipulate, agree, and request that this Court extend the dispositive motion deadline from 3 the current date of August 9, 2021 for an additional thirty (30) days up to September 8, 2021. At 4 the time that the parties requested the first extension of this deadline, other parties named in the 5 Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) had not been served yet. The newly named Defendant has 6 recently been served. In addition, the parties require additional time due to deadlines and 7 hearings in other matters. 8 A. Discovery Completed to Date 9 The parties have exchanged their initial Rule 26 Disclosures and several supplements. 10 LVMPD served written discovery (Interrogatories, Requests for Admissions and Requests for 11 Production of Documents) on Plaintiff which Plaintiff responded to, and numerous third-party 12 subpoenas. LVMPD disclosed its Expert Report timely and the deposition of Plaintiff was taken. 13 Discovery closed on June 8, 2021, [ECF No. 32]. 14 B. Discovery Remaining to be Completed 15 Discovery closed on June 8, 2021. A new party, Trooper McColl filed a Motion to 16 Extend Time to Respond to the Complaint which was granted as unopposed. [ECF No. 52] The 17 response of one of the newly added parties is due August 31, 2021. Plaintiff is also in the process 18 of securing service of process upon newly added defendant, Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP). 19 Plaintiff has remaining discovery to be completed including written discovery and depositions of 20 the parties and their experts. It is anticipated that the newly added Defendants will also need to 21 undertake discovery, which will require a further extension of the close of discovery as well as 22 other related deadlines. 23 / / / 24 / / / 1 C. Reason for Request for Extension of Dispositive Motion Deadline 2 Plaintiff filed her Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on May 10, 2021. [ECF No. 35]. 3 LVMPD filed an Answer to the SAC and also a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“MSJ”). 4 [ECF Nos. 27 and 36]. The MSJ solely addresses Plaintiff’s Monell claim in the SAC and not 5 any other claims. The MSJ is now fully briefed and pending. 6 The SAC named two new Defendants; Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP) and Nevada 7 Highway Patrol Trooper McColl. Trooper McColl was served with the SAC on July 20, 2021. 8 Plaintiff is in the process of serving NHP. It is possible that discovery may need to be reopened 9 and related deadlines extended since Trooper McColl has just been served and NHP is in the 10 process of being served. In that event, the need to file dispositive motions at this time will be 11 moot. 12 Finally, Counsel has many other deadlines and hearings around the same time as the 13 dispositive motion deadline in this case. Counsel will need additional time to prepare their 14 motions. As such, good cause is shown for an extension of the dispositive motion deadline. 15 D. Proposed Extended Deadline for Dispositive Motions 16 Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that this Court enter an order as follows: 17 (1) Dispositive Motions. 18 The parties request the current deadline of August 9, 2021 be extended to September 8, 19 2021. 20 / / / 21 / / / 22 / / / 23 / / / 24 / / / 1 The parties recognize that they are making this request fewer than twenty-one days 2 before the current dispositive motion deadlines of August 9, 2021, however the parties submit 3 that good cause and excusable neglect exists for the delay. 4 LR 26-3 states in relevant part: 5 A request made after the expiration of the subject deadline will not be granted unless the movant also demonstrates that the failure to act was the 6 result of excusable neglect. 7 In evaluating excusable neglect, the court considers the following factors: (1) the reason 8 for the delay and whether it was in the reasonable control of the moving party, (2) whether the 9 moving party acted in good faith, (3) the length of the delay and its potential impact on the 10 proceedings, and (4) the danger of prejudice to the nonmoving party. See Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. 11 v. Brunswick Assocs., 507 U.S. 380, 395 S. Ct. 1489, 123 L.Ed.2d 74 (1993). The parties 12 previously extended this deadline due to the fact that the new Defendants had not been served. 13 The parties requested the extension less than thirty (30) days ago. Because this is a second 14 request to extend, the parties were not aware twenty-one (21) days ago that additional time 15 would be needed. 16 / / / 17 / / / 18 / / / 19 / / / 20 / / / 21 / / / 22 / / / 23 / / / 24 / / / 1 This request for an extension is made in good faith and joined by all the parties in this 2 ||case. This request is not timely but the parties believe they have shown excusable neglect in the 3 || delay in requesting the extension. Trial is not yet set in this matter and LVMPD has only filed a 4 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Accordingly, this extension will not delay this case. 5 || Moreover, since this request is a joint request, neither party will be prejudiced. The extension 6 || will allow the parties the necessary time to prepare motions. 7 DATED this day of August, 2021. 8 || KAEMPFER CROWELL MUELLER & ASSOCIATES, INC. By: _/s/ Lyssa Anderson By: _/s/ Craig Mueller 10 LYSSA S. ANDERSON CRAIG A. MUELLER Nevada Bar No. 5781 Nevada Bar No. 4703 11 RYAN DANIELS 723 South Seventh Street Nevada Bar No. 13094 Las Vegas, NV 89101 12 KRISTOPHER J. KALKOWSKI Attorneys for Plaintiff Nevada Bar No. 14892 13 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, #650 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 14 Attorneys for Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 15 Department 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 17 DATED this 10th day of August, 2021. 18 19 Daniel J. Aloregts 20 United States Magistrate Judge 21 agg 22