Solomon v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department ( 2024 )

1 MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE, Nevada Bar No. 10931 LEO S. WOLPERT, Nevada Bar No. 12658 2) |MCLETCHIE LAW 602 South Tenth St. 3 | |Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 4 Telephone: (702) 728-5300; Fax: (702) 425-8220 Email: maggie@nvlitigation.com 5 | |Counsel for Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8) | NEBYOU SOLOMON, an individual, Case No.: 2:22-cv-00847-JCM-DJA ? Plaintiff, 10 VS. 11|| LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE | SUPULATION AND ORDER TO DEPARTMENT; JOSEPH LOMBARDO, | EXTEND DISCOVERY PLAN AND 12 | | individual; DOE OFFICERS I - III, SCHEDULING ORDER DEADLINES individuals, g 1 THIRD REQUEST ashe 14 Defendants. 15 Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon (“Plaintiff”), by and through his counsel of record, 5 16 Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. and Leo S. Wolpert, Esq., of McLetchie Law, and Defendants, 63 & 17 | {the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (the “Department” or “LVMPD”) and Sheriff 1g | [Joseph Lombardo (“Lombardo”), collectively (“LVMPD Defendants”), by and through their 19 | [counsel of record, Nick D. Crosby, Esq. of Marquis Aurbach, hereby stipulate and agree to 20 | |extend the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines an additional ninety (90) days. 21 | |This Stipulation is being entered in good faith and not for purposes of delay. 02 I. STATUS OF DISCOVERY. PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY. 23 1. Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 24 26.1(a)(1) dated August 19, 2022. 25 2. Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Interrogatories to LVMPD - Set One dated November 1, 2022. 27 28 1 3. Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Requests for Production of Documents to 2 | |LVMPD - Set One dated November 1, 2022. 3 4. Plaintiff's First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents 4] | Pursuant to FRCP 26. 1(a)(1) dated January 3, 2023. 5 5. Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Requests for Production to LVMPD - Set Two 6 dated May 16, 2023. 6. Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Interrogatories to LVMPD —- Set Two dated March 15, 2024. 9 DEFENDANTS’ DISCOVERY. 10 1. LVMPD Defendants’ Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents 11) |Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1) dated August 19, 2022. 12 2. LVMPD’s Answers to Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Interrogatories - Set 13 One dated December 5, 2022. : 3. LVMPD’s Responses to Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Requests for 1S Production of Documents - Set One dated December 5, 2022. 4. LVMPD Defendants’ First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1) dated December 5, 2022. 5. LVMPD Defendants’ Second Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1) dated July 6, 2023. 6. LVMPD’s Answers to Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Requests for Production of Documents - Set Two dated July 17, 2023. 3 7. LVMPD’s Answers to Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon’s Interrogatories - Set 94 | | Two dated April 17, 2024. 25 8. LVMPD Defendants’ First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Nebyou 26 | |Solomon dated July 1, 2024. 27 9. LVMPD Defendants’ First Set of Request for Production of Documents 28 | |to Plaintiff Nebyou Solomon dated July 1, 2024. 1 Hl. DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED. 2 The Parties are actively conducting discovery. The Parties are working on 3 | |depositions of named parties and witnesses. For the reasons explained below, the Parties |will need additional time to propound written discovery, respond to written discovery, conduct depositions, and disclose experts. 6 I. SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF WHY EXTENSION IS NECESSARY. 7 Pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, the Parties submit that good cause exists for the 8 | lextension requested. This is the first request for an extension of discovery deadlines in this ? | |matter. The Parties acknowledge that, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, a stipulation to extend a 10) deadline set forth in a discovery plan must be submitted to the Court no later than 21 days Ihefore the expiration of the subject deadline, and that a request made within 21 days must be supported by a showing of good cause. Here, most of the deadlines the Parties seek to extend 13 are outside of the 21-day window, but the deadline for initial expert disclosures 1s within this : 21-day window. Ele: 5 The Parties have been diligently conducting discovery and continue to conduct 16 discovery. The Parties are working on scheduling the depositions of named parties and 17 witnesses. The Parties contend an extension of discovery deadlines enables them to continue 18 to conduct necessary discovery so that this matter is fairly resolved and give the experts the 19 opportunity to review all discovery produced in this dispute. Finally, the Parties together 20 request this in good faith and to further the resolution of this complicated case on the merits, 2! and not for any purpose of delay. As noted above, the good cause analysis 1s proper for the dates the Parties seek to extend. The Parties meet both the good standard. “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 1 | |court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action 2 | |and proceeding”). As the procedural history of this case illustrates, the Parties have been 3 diligent in litigating this matter and have previously stayed this matter to engage in settlement 4 | Idiscussions. The Parties are continuing to engage in written discovery and have begun 5 coordinating the taking of depositions. Additionally, counsel for the Parties in this matter are 6 litigating several other unrelated matters against each other which are well-advanced and 7| Ihave competing demands, and while competing demands of litigation are merely one of many 8 | |reasons for the instant 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 10 litigation, similar requests can be expedited because they may have been done at least in part in this case; in this case, it would be a matter of a universal benefit to the ends of justice and future efficiencies. 13 Finally, counsel for Plaintiffs have suffered several unexpected family emergencies : and staffing changes since the last time deadlines were extended in this matter. First, Pieter IS O’Leary left McLetchie law effective May 3, 2024, causing Ms. McLetchie and Mr. Wolpert 3 16 to devote additional time to matters on which he was lead counsel. Second, Mr. Wolpert was required to be out of jurisdiction to care for his father—who was suffering from ALS—in 8 Tucson, Arizona. Mr. Wolpert’s father passed away on May 17, 2024, requiring Mr. Wolpert to remain in Arizona to assist his widowed mother with the funeral and winding up his “0 father’s affairs in May and June. Third, Ms. McLetchie was assisting her mother with a treatment for Stage IV cancer. Ms. McLetchie’s mother passed away on July 28, 2024, requiring Ms. McLetchie to assist with funeral arrangements and attending to her late °° mother’s affairs and estate. Finally, lead counsel for Defendants, Jaqueline Nichols, recently left the firm on August 2, 2024, requiring the undersigned Defendants’ counsel to assume lead counsel in this matter (in addition to several other matters Mrs. Nichols was handling). Thus, the standards to extend all deadlines, including the expert deadlines, are satisfied here. 38 /// 1 IV. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR REMAINING DEADLINES 2 Po Current Deadline Proposed New Deadline Amend Pleadings and Add March 21, 2023 Past Due/Unchanged 3 Parties 4 Initial Expert Disclosures August 6, 2024 November 4, 2024 5 Rebuttal Expert Disclosures September 6, 2024 December 5, 2024 6 Discovery Cut-Off October 8, 2024 January 6, 2025 November, 2024 | February §, 2028 Pretrial Order December 6, 2024 March 6, 2025 (If 8 dispositive motions are filed, the deadline shall be 9 suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision of the 10 dispositive motions or further order of the Court.) 11 Based on the foregoing stipulation and proposed deadlines plan, the Parties request 12 that the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines be extended additional ninety (90) 13 14 days so that the parties may conduct additional discovery and depositions. | Dated this 6 day of August, 2023. Dated this 6" day of August, 2024. S252 16 Re MCLETCHIE LAW MARQUIS AURBACH © 17 By: /s/ Leo S. Wolpert By: /s/ Nick D. Crosby 18 Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. Nick D. Crosby, Esq. 19 Nevada Bar No. 10931 Nevada Bar No. 8996 Leo S. Wolpert, Esq. 10001 Park Run Drive 20 Nevada Bar No. 12658 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 602 South 10th Street Attorney for Defendants Las Vegas 21 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Metropolitan Police Department and 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff Nebyou Sheriff Joseph Lombardo Solomon 23 24 IT IS SO QRDERED: XP 1) 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE