Wiegand v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ( 2024 )

1 ROBERT W. FREEMAN Nevada Bar No. 3062 2 Robert.Freeman@lewisbrisbois.com FRANK A. TODDRE II 3 Nevada Bar No. 11474 Frank.Toddre@lewisbrisbois.com 4 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 5 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 Telephone: 702.893.3383 6 Facsimile: 702.893.3789 Attorneys for State Farm Mutual Automobile 7 Insurance Company 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 *** 11 CAMERON WIEGAND, Case No.: 2:23-cv-01000-CDS-DJA 12 Plaintiff, SUPPLEMENTAL STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY 13 vs. DEADLINES 14 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE [FOURTH REQUEST] INSURANCE COMPANY; MESSNER 15 REEVES LLP; STEVEN KNAUSS; JOSE RIVERA; ELLEN STOEBLING; DOES 1 16 through 10; inclusive and ROE CORPORATIONS I through 10, inclusive, 17 Defendants. 18 19 Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-3, the parties, by and through their respective counsel of 20 record, hereby stipulate and request that this Court extend discovery in the above-captioned case, as 21 set forth below. In support of this Supplemental Stipulation and Request, the parties state as follows: 22 DISCOVERY COMPLETED 23 1. On May 31, 2023, Plaintiff served his NRCP 16.1 Initial Disclosures. Plaintiff has supplemented his 24 FRCP 26.1 disclosures five (5) times, the last on or about, August 28, 2024. 25 2. On July 13 2023, Defendant served its NRCP 16.1 Initial Disclosures. Defendant has supplemented 26 his FRCP 26.1 disclosures six (6) times, the last on or about, February 14, 2024. 27 3. On September 15, 2023, Plaintiff served written discovery on Defendant. Defendant responded 1 4. On September 18, 2023, Plaintiff served his second set of written discovery on Defendant. Defendant 2 responded approximately, May 10, 2024. 3 5. On September 25, 2023, Defendants served written discovery on Plaintiff. Plaintiff responded 4 approximately November 8, 2023, January 5, 2024, and June 14, 2024. 5 6. On May 24, 2024, Plaintiff served their third set of written discovery on Defendant. Defendant has 6 not yet responded. 7 7. Plaintiff deposed witness, Miguel Flores on August 6, 2024 8 8. On September 26, 2024, Plaintiff served their fourth set of written discovery on Defendant. 9 Defendant has not yet responded. 10 9. Defendants deposed fact witness, Jasmine Colombo-Davis on October 25, 2023. 11 10. Plaintiff disclosed his initial experts on October 11, 2024. 12 DISCOVERY REMAINING 13 1. The parties will continue participating in written discovery. 14 2. The parties will depose any additional fact witnesses. 15 3. Plaintiff will depose State Farm’s representatives, Peter Gentile and Lou Kesthely. 16 4. Plaintiff will depose Defendant’s FRCP 30(b)(6) witness(es). 17 5. Defendants will depose Plaintiff. 18 6. Defendants will respond to Plaintiff’s written discovery. 19 7. The parties may depose any and all other witnesses garnered through discovery, potentially including 20 treatment providers and claims adjusters. 21 8. The parties may conduct depositions of the designated expert witnesses. 22 9. Any and all remaining discovery required as permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 23 WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED 24 The parties aver, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, that good cause exists for the following 25 requested extension. A standard of “good cause” governs. D. Nev. Local Rule 26-3. Good cause 26 “primarily considers the diligence” of the parties seeking the extension.1 “Motions for extension 27 1 Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (explaining that “[t]he 1 must include a statement specifying the discovery completed, a description of discovery remaining, 2 the reasons why the deadline was not satisfied, and a proposed schedule for completing remaining 3 discovery.”2 In addition, requests made after the expiration of the subject deadline must also 4 demonstrate that the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect. Dev. Nev. Local Rule 26-3. 5 “[D]istrict Courts…retain broad discretion to control their dockets….”3 6 The parties have been diligent in moving the case forward: participating in a reasonable 7 amount of discovery, including exchanging their initial lists of witnesses and documents; 8 propounding written discovery requests and preparing responses thereto; records procurement; and 9 preparing for Plaintiff’s and State Farm’s representatives depositions. 10 The parties submit that good cause and excusable neglect exist for an additional extension 11 of the discovery deadlines. Counsel for State Farm had failed to deliver the Stipulation to opposing 12 counsel prior to the expert discovery cutoff whilst the parties were setting out the parameters of the 13 settlement conference. This was a good faith mistake/calendaring error by counsel. 14 The parties submit there will be no prejudice, as the Plaintiff has had the opportunity to 15 present her expert and will be able to use that analysis at mediation. The parties have informally 16 agreed to stay depositions of the remaining fact witnesses—Plaintiff and two State Farm fact 17 witnesses—until after mediation. This request for an extension of time is not sought for any 18 improper purpose or other purpose of delay. Rather, the parties seek this extension solely for the 19 purpose of allowing the parties to attend mediation. 20 Counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to enter mediation. The parties are going 21 to Advanced Resolution Management for non-binding mediation scheduled on January 7, 2025 with 22 Paul M. Haire, Esq. Therefore, counsel are requesting this extension in an attempt to resolve this 23 matter without additional Court involvement, and seek for an extension of the dates beyond the 24 current mediation date of January 7, 2025. 25 district court may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met despite the diligence 26 of the parties seeking the extension.”) (internal quotations omitted). 2 Hampton v. Nevada, No. 2:20-cv-00578-APG-DJA, 2021 WL 3573640, at *2 (D. Nev. July 29, 27 2021). 3 Shahrokhi v. Harter, No. 2:21-cv-01126-RFB-NJK, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 247936, at *4 (D.Nev. 1 Extension or Modification of The Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. LR 26-3 governs 2 modifications or extension of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Any stipulation or motion 3 to extend or modify that Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order must be made no later than twenty- 4 one (21) days before the expiration of the subject deadline and must comply fully with LR 26-3. 5 This stipulation is made more than 21 days before the expiration of any deadlines. 6 This is the supplemental fourth (4th) request for extension of time in this matter.4 The parties 7 respectfully submit that the reasons set forth above constitute compelling reasons for the requested 8 extension. 9 The following is a list of the current discovery deadlines and the parties’ proposed extended 10 deadlines: 11 Scheduled Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline 12 Discovery Cut-off Tuesday, December 10, 2024 Wednesday, April 9, 2025 13 Deadline to Amend Closed. Closed. 14 Pleadings or Add Parties 15 Expert Disclosure pursuant Friday, October 11, 2024 Closed. to FRCP 26 (a)(2) 16 Rebuttal Expert Disclosure Tuesday, November 12, 2024 Closed. 17 pursuant to FRCP. 26(a)(2) 18 Dispositive Motions Friday, January 10, 2025 Monday, May 12, 2025 19 Joint Pretrial Order Monday, February 10, 2025 Tuesday, June 10, 2025 20 If dispositive motions are 21 pending, then the parties will serve their Joint Pretrial Order 22 within thirty days of the Court’s order as to the parties’ 23 dispositive motions. 24 25 / / / 26 27 4 On October 21, 2024, this honorable court submitted a Minutes Order in Chambers denying without prejudice the parties proposed October 18, 2024 Stipulation and Order to Extend Discovery 1 WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request this Court extend the discovery period one 2 hundred and twenty (120) days in accordance with the table above. 3 Dated this 12th day of November, 2024 Dated this 12th day of November, 2024 4 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & H&P LAW SMITH LLP 5 6 /s/ Frank A. Toddre, II /s/ Cara Xidis ROBERT W. FREEMAN MARJORIE L. HAUF 7 Nevada Bar No. 3062 Nevada Bar No. 8111 FRANK A. TODDRE II MATTHEW G. PFAU 8 Nevada Bar No. 11474 Nevada Bar No. 11439 6385 S. Rainbow Boulevard, Suite 600 CARA XIDIS 9 Las Vegas, Nevada 89118 Nevada Bar No. 11743 Attorneys for Defendant State Farm 710 South 9th Street 10 Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Attorneys for Plaintiff 11 12 ORDER 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 Dated this 13th day of November, 2024. 15 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27