Rogers v. LVMPD (Police Department) ( 2023 )

I MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE, Nevada Bar No. 10931 PIETER M. O’LEARY, Nevada Bar No. 15297 2 | |LEO S. WOLPERT, Nevada Bar No. 12658 MCLETCHIE LAW 3 | |602 South Tenth Street 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: (702) 728-5300; Fax: (702) 425-8220 5 | |Email: efile @nvlitigation.com 6 Attorney for Plaintiffs 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 MICHAEL ROGERS, an individual; Case No.: 2:22-cv-00867-CDS-DJA ? | |NIKITA WRIGHT, an individual, 10 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 11 VS. EXTEND DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEUDLING ORDER |LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE | DEADLINES 13 | | DEPARTMENT; JOSEPH LOMBARDO, in his individual capacity; ALFREDO (SECOND REQUEST) 14 | | QUINTERO, individually; PRAVEEN RAJ, 1 individually; DOE OFFICERS I - IV, >| | individually, 16 Defendants. 17 18 Michael Rogers and Nikita Wright (“Plaintiffs”), by and through their counsel of 19 | |record, and Defendants, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (“LVMPD”), Sheriff 20 | |Joseph Lombardo, Alfredo Quintero, and Praveen Raj, (collectively, “LVMPD 21 | |Defendants”), by and through their respective counsel (collectively, “the Parties”), hereby 22 | |agree and jointly stipulate to extend the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines an 23 | |additional sixty (60) days. This Stipulation is being entered in good faith and not for purposes 24 | |of delay. a5 | |/// 26 | |/// a7 | \/// 98 | \/// 1 I. STATUS OF DISCOVERY. 2 A. PLAINTIFFS’ DISCOVERY. 3 1. Plaintiffs’ Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP |26. 1(a)(1), dated August 22, 2022. 5 2. Plaintiff Michael Rogers’ Request for Production of Documents to 6 Defendant LVMPD - Set One, dated December 15, 2022. 7 3. Plaintiff Nikita Wright’s Request for Production of Documents to 8 Defendant LVMPD -— Set One, dated May 16, 2023. ? B. DEFENDANTS’ DISCOVERY. 10 4. LVMPD Defendants’ Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated August 19, 2022. 5. LVMPD Defendants’ First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated January 17, 2023. 15 6. LVMPD’s Responses to Plaintiff Michael Rogers’ Requests for Production ||" Set One, dated January 17, 2023. 7 7. LVMPD’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Nikita Wright, dated April 1g | 2023. 19 8. LVMPD’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents to Plaintiff 20 | |Nikita Wright, dated April 21, 2023. 21 9. LVMPD’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Michael Rogers, dated 22 | |April 21, 2023. 23 10. LVMPD’s First Set of Requests for Production of Documents to Plaintiff 24 | |Michael Rogers, dated April 21, 2023. 25 Il. DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED. 26 The Parties are actively conducting discovery. Both Parties have outstanding 27 discovery responses that are due May 31, 2023, and June 19, 2023. The Parties are also 28 working on depositions of named parties and witnesses. The Parties will need additional time 1 | |to propound written discovery, respond to written discovery, and conduct depositions prior 2 | |to expert disclosures to avoid unnecessary additional costs related to expert disclosures. 3)| Il. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF WHY EXTENSION IS NECESSARY. 4 Pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, the Parties submit that good cause exists for the lextension requested. This is the second request for an extension of discovery deadlines in 6| |this matter. The Parties acknowledge that, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, a stipulation to 7| Jextend a deadline set forth in a discovery plan must be submitted to the Court no later than 8} lo1 days before the expiration of the subject deadline, and that a request made within 21 days ? | | must be supported by a showing of good cause. All of the deadlines the Parties are requesting 10 be extended expire outside of the 21 day window that necessitates a showing of good cause. The Parties have been diligently conducting discovery and continue to conduct discovery. The Parties are working on scheduling the depositions of named parties and 13 witnesses. Additionally, Plaintiffs have sought leave to amend their Complaint to add new parties and claims. As such, the Parties will need additional time to propound written IS discovery, respond to written discovery, continue to resolve outstanding discovery disputes, 16 and conduct depositions. The Parties contend that it is more efficient to allow further M discovery to be completed prior to expert disclosures to avoid unnecessary additional costs 8 related to expert disclosures. Finally, the Parties together request this in good faith and to further the resolution *0 of this complicated case on the merits, and not for any purpose of delay. The Parties thus respectfully request an extension of time to extend the discovery in this matter to enable to them to conduct necessary discovery in this matter and so that this matter is fairly resolved on the merits. “Good cause to extend a discovery deadline exists ‘if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Derosa v. Blood Sys., Inc., No. 2:13-cv-0137-JCM-NJK, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108235, 2013 WL *° 3975764, at 1 (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2013) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 (providing that the Rules of Civil Procedure “should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to 1 | |secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”). As 2 | |the procedural history of this case illustrates, the Parties have been diligent in litigating this 3||matter. The Parties are continuing to engage in written discovery and have begun 4 coordinating the taking of depositions. Plaintiffs also have a pending Motion to Amend their 5 Complaint, which would identify four (4) Defendant officers otherwise included as Doe 6 | | Officers I— IV, and add additional claims for violations of the Nevada Constitution. 7 Additionally, counsel for the Parties in this matter are litigating several other 8 | unrelated matters against each other which are well-advanced and have competing demands, ? | |and while competing demands of litigation are merely one of many reasons for the instant 10 request, it should be noted that the other litigation between the same counsel involving similar issues can only benefit from expanded discovery so that in other litigation, similar 2 requests can be expedited because they may have been done at least in part in this case; in 1S this case, it would be a matter of a universal benefit to the ends of justice and future M4 efficiencies. Finally, counsel for Plaintiffs is preparing for a trial in July that requires 15 significant time and attention, and counsel for Defendants will be out of the jurisdiction for 16 two (2) weeks in June, further compounding the need for an extension of discovery deadlines. 17 IV. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING ALL REMAINING 18 DEADLINES 19 : Current Deadline Proposed New Deadline 20| |) Amend Pleadings and March 24, 2023 Expired 91 | || Add Parties Initial Expert Disclosures June 23, 2023 August 22, 2023 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures July 24, 2023 September 22, 2023 231 | Discovery Cut-Off August 21, 2023 October 20, 2023 24 September 22, 2023 November 21, 2023 5 Pretrial Order October 23, 2023 December 22, 2023 (if dispositive motions are filed, the 26 deadline shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision of 27 the dispositive motions or further order of the Court.) 28 1 Based on the foregoing stipulation and proposed deadlines plan, the Parties request 2 | |that the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines be extended additional sixty (60) 3 days so that the parties may conduct additional discovery, conduct depositions and efficiently 4 litigate the case based on the merits. 5 6 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 7 8 | | Dated this 30" day of May, 2023. Dated this 30" day of May, 2023. 9|| MCLETCHIE LAW MARQUIS AURBACH 10 ll By: /s/ Margaret A. McLetchie By: /s/ Jackie V. Nichols Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. Jackie V. Nichols, Esq. 12 Nevada Bar No. 10931 Nevada Bar No. 14246 Leo S. Wolpert, Esq. 10001 Park Run Drive 13 Nevada Bar No. 12658 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 14 Pieter M. O’Leary, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants Nevada Bar No. 15297 15 602 South 10th Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 16 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 17 18 19 ORDER 20 YP aA 21 >< “(YW DANIEL J. ALBREGTS 22 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 23 DATED: May 31, 2023 24 25 26 27 28