Anderson v. Department of Corrections ( 2024 )

1 McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP 2 Katherine J. Gordon Nevada Bar No. 5813 3 katherine.gordon@mccormickbarstow.com Cheryl A. Grames 4 Nevada Bar No. 12752 cheryl.grames@mccormickbarstow.com 5 8337 West Sunset Road, Suite 350 Las Vegas, Nevada 89113 6 Telephone: (702) 949-1100 Facsimile: (702) 949-1101 7 Attorneys for Defendant 8 George Timothy Kelly, M.D. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA, SOUTHERN DIVISION 11 12 ANTHONY K. ANDERSON, an individual, Case No. 2:21-cv-00514-CDS-EJY 13 Plaintiff, STIPULATION TO EXTEND 14 DISCOVERY DEADLINES v. 15 (SECOND REQUEST) NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF 16 CORRECTIONS; HENRY LANDSMAN, M.D. an individual; ROMEO ARANSAS, 17 M.D., an individual; REBECCA KOZLOFF, an individual; SONYA CARRILLO, R.N., an 18 individual; GEORGE TIMOTHY KELLY, M.D., an individual, 19 Defendants. 20 21 DEFENDANT GEORGE TIMOTHY KELLY, M.D. (“Dr. Kelly”), PLAINTIFF 22 ANTHONY K. ANDERSON (“Plaintiff”), and DEFENDANTS NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF 23 CORRECTIONS, HENRY LANDSMAN, M.D., ROMEO ARANSAS, M.D., REBECCA 24 KOZLOFF, and SONYA CARRILO, R.N. (collectively, the “NDOC Defendants”), by and through 25 their respective counsel, and pursuant to LR IA 6-1 and LR 26-3, hereby request a ninety- (90) day 26 extension of the discovery deadlines set forth in the Scheduling Order (ECF No. 97). The current 27 Scheduling Order followed the Court’s March 31, 2024 Order Granting Dr. Kelly’s Motion to 1 Court gave Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint again. (See ECF No. 89). Plaintiff filed his Third 2 Amended Complaint on April 29, 2024 (ECF No. 93), and all defendants filed an Answer thereto 3 (ECF Nos. 96 and 98). 4 I. DISCOVERY COMPLETED BY THE PARTIES 5 All parties served their initial disclosures and Dr. Kelly served a supplement to his initial 6 disclosures. Plaintiff propounded written discovery on Dr. Kelly, and Dr. Kelly served his responses 7 thereto. Dr. Kelly propounded written discovery on NDOC, and await NDOC’s responses. Dr. 8 Kelly has initiated the meeting and conferring process with NDOC as to an Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) 9 witness deposition, having transmitted proposed deposition topics. Counsel for Dr. Kelly and 10 NDOC will confer shortly regarding those topics. 11 II. DISCOVERY WHICH REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED 12 The parties anticipate the following discovery is necessary to develop their respective 13 theories of liability and defenses: 14 1. Dr. Kelly will depose the Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) witness for NDOC after meeting 15 and conferring regarding topics and timing. The parties anticipate there may be 16 motion practice involved if they cannot reach agreement. 17 2. Plaintiff will supplement his initial disclosures with updated medical records for 18 treatment subsequent to his incarceration and Plaintiff will provide executed 19 authorizations to Dr. Kelly to obtain those records. 20 3. Subsequent to receipt of the updated medical records, Dr. Kelly will depose Plaintiff. 21 4. Plaintiff will depose Dr. Kelly. 22 5. Thereafter, the parties will serve their expert witness designations and conduct expert 23 witness depositions. 24 III. REASON WHY DISCOVERY WAS NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT SET BY THE DISCOVERY PLAN 25 The parties have been working diligently and cooperatively since the stay of proceedings 26 was lifted, and intend to continue doing so. When discussing how much time was needed for 27 discovery, counsel for the parties did not fully appreciate at that time that there would be a need 1 obtain additional medical records from providers unaffiliated with NDOC, and that an Fed. R. Civ. 2 P. 30(b)(6) witness deposition for NDOC would be needed to discuss its policies, procedures, and 3 practices relevant to this action. Additionally, the parties are finalizing discussions regarding a 4 settlement conference through the Court, and the logistics of finding availability for all counsel and 5 all parties and the Court while summer vacations are underway is typically a challenging 6 undertaking. 7 IV. GOOD CAUSE EXISTS TO GRANT THE REQUESTED EXTENSION 8 The parties have complied with the timeframe outlined by LR 26-3, as it is submitted more 9 than 21 days before the expiration of the July 29, 2024 deadline for initial expert witness disclosures, 10 which is the earliest discovery deadline the parties seek to extend by ninety (90) days. The parties 11 have engaged in discovery, however, any expert discovery will be best and most meaningfully 12 conducted following further written discovery and obtaining medical records. The parties therefore 13 maintain that a 90-day extension of the existing discovery deadline dates is necessary to provide 14 time to retain experts who will provide reports, and who are likely to be deposed. The extension 15 will also accommodate the parties’ discussions for finalizing agreement as to a settlement 16 conference and coordinating the actual event, with the hope of minimizing fees and costs associated 17 with retaining and deposing expert witnesses. 18 V. THE CURRENT SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETION OF ALL REMAINING DISCOVERY: 19 20 The parties request that the pertinent discovery deadlines set forth in the Court’s Scheduling 21 Order be continued ninety (90) days, as follows: 22 A. ESTIMATE OF TIME REQUIRED FOR DISCOVERY: Pursuant to Local Rule 26- 23 1(b)(1), and with the Court’s approval, discovery shall be completed on or before December 23, 24 2024. 25 B. EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURES: Unless otherwise stated herein, and the Court 26 so orders, the date for the parties to exchange initial expert witness disclosures shall be sixty (60) 27 days prior to the discovery cut-off date, but not later than October 24, 2024, and rebuttal expert 1 22, 2024. 2 C. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS: Unless otherwise stated herein, and the Court so orders, 3 the date for filing dispositive motions shall be thirty (30) days after the discovery cut-off date, but 4 not later than January 22, 2025. 5 / / / 6 / / / 7 / / / 8 / / / 9 / / / 10 / / / 11 / / / 12 / / / 13 / / / 14 / / / 15 / / / 16 / / / 17 / / / 18 / / / 19 / / / 20 / / / 21 / / / 22 / / / 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 1 D. JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER: The parties will submit the Joint Pretrial Order thirty 2 (30) days after the dispositive motion deadline of February 21, 2025. If the Court does not issue 3 its Order regarding the parties’ dispositive motions within thirty (30) days, the deadline for the Joint 4 Pretrial Order will be thirty (30) days after the Court issues its Order. 5 It is so stipulated and agreed: 6 Dated: July 2, 2024 Dated: July 2, 2024 7 McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, Wayte & Carruth LLP P.C. 8 9 By: /s/ Cheryl A. Grames By: /s/ Elody C. Tignor Katherine J. Gordon Anthony L. Martin 10 Nevada Bar No. 5813 Nevada Bar No. 8177 Cheryl A. Grames Elody C. Tignor 11 Nevada Bar No. 12752 Nevada Bar No. 15663 8337 W. Sunset Road, Ste. 350 10801 W. Charleston Blvd, Ste. 500 12 Las Vegas, NV 89113 Las Vegas, NV 89135 13 Attorneys for Defendant George Timothy Attorneys for Plaintiff Anthony K. Kelly, M.D. Anderson 14 15 Dated: July 2, 2024 16 Nevada Attorney General’s Office 17 By: /s/ Kyle L. Hill 18 Kyle L. Hill Nevada Bar No. 16094 19 555 E. Washington Ave. Las Vegas, NV 89101 20 Attorneys for Defendants Nevada Dept. of 21 Corrections, Henry Landsman, M.D., Romeo Aransas, M.D., Rebecca Kozloff, 22 and Sonya Carrilo, R.N. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 United States Magistrate Judge 26 27 DATED thi s 4 t h day of July , 2024.