American Preparatory Schools, Inc. v. Nevada Charter Academies

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided May 13, 2021·No. 2:20-cv-01205·Unknown

Opinion

DALE A. HAYES, JR., ESQ. 2 Nevada Bar No. 9056 LIANE K. WAKAYAMA, ESQ. 3 Nevada Bar No. 11313 Nevada Bar No. 14379 5 4735 S. Durango Drive, Ste. 105 Las Vegas, Nevada 89147 6 (702) 656-0808 – Telephone (702) 655-1047 – Facsimile 7 dhayes@hwlawNV.com 8 lkw@hwlawNV.com jholmes@hwlawNV.com 9 Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter Academies d/b/a American Preparatory 10 Academy – Las Vegas

11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 AMERICAN PREPARATORY SCHOOLS, Case Number: INC., a Utah Corporation, 2:20-cv-01205-JAD-NJK 14 Plaintiff, 15 vs. 16 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO NEVADA CHARTER ACADEMIES d/b/a EXTEND TIME FOR FILING OF 17 AMERICAN PREPARATORY ACADEMY— RESPONSES TO THIRD AMENDED LAS VEGAS, a Nevada Corporation, COMPLAINT 18 RACHELLE HULET, an individual, AND 19 Defendants. 20 STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS TO FINALIZE SETTLEMENT 21 (FIFTH REQUEST) 22 ECF Nos. 93, 96 23 Plaintiff American Preparatory Schools, Inc. (“Plaintiff”), by and through its counsel of 24 record, the law firms of Parr Brown Gee & Loveless and the Takos Law Group, LTD., Defendant 25 Nevada Charter Academies d/b/a American Preparatory Academy – Las Vegas (“APA”), by and 26 through its counsel of record, the law firms of Lipson Neilson P.C. and Hayes Wakayama, and 27 Defendant Rachelle Hulet (“Hulet”), by and through her counsel of record, the law firm of Hogan 28 Hulet, (collectively the “Parties”), hereby stipulate and agree as follows: 1. On December 16, 2020, this Court filed an Order instructing the Plaintiff to file its 2 Third Amended Complaint no later than December 18, 2020, and Defendants to file their responses 3 to Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint by January 15, 2021 [ECF No. 82]. 4 2. On December 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed its Third Amended Complaint [ECF No. 83]. 5 3. On January 12, 2021, a Notice of Appearance of Co-Defense Counsel was filed 6 noticing the appearance of the law firm of Hayes Wakayama as co-defense counsel for Defendant 7 APA, together with the law firm of Lipson Neilson [ECF No. 84]. 8 4. The Parties had agreed to extend the deadline for Defendants’ to file their responses 9 to Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint for two weeks from January 15, 2021 up through and 10 including January 29, 2021. [ECF 87]. 11 5. The reason for the Parties’ requesting the third extension was they had recently 12 engaged in meaningful resolution discussions, and the parties wished to conduct such negotiations 13 without the complications that answers and counterclaims may have created. 14 6. It was accordingly in the best interest of all Parties not to publish the Defendants’ 15 responses to the Third Amended Complaint at the time, and the Parties agreed that a two-week 16 extension would allow for further productive settlement discussions. Therefore, the Parties agreed 17 to extend the deadline from January 29, 2021 to February 12, 2021. 18 7. Thereafter, the parties agreed to extend the deadline in order to participate in private 19 mediation, as reflected in the Fourth Stipulation and Order to Extend. [ECF #91 & 92]. 20 8. On May 3, 2021 and May 4, 2021, the parties participated in private mediation with 21 Hon. Judge Trevor L. Atkin (Ret.) at Advanced Resolution Management. 22 9. After two full days of mediation, the parties continued to negotiate with the 23 assistance of Judge Adkin throughout this past week, into today. 24 10. Today, on the evening of May 12, 2021, the parties reached an agreement to resolve 25 all claims asserted, and not yet asserted. 26 27 28 2 extensions will be granted; however, the parties are representing to this Court that the matter has 3 resolved in principle. 4 12. The agreement is very complex insomuch as finalizing the agreement will require 5 completion of due diligence to finalize the terms. 6 13. The due diligence will involve hiring additional parties to assist and finalize 7 necessary transactions. 8 14. The parties desire to keep all issues confidential at this time given the nature of the 9 claims. 10 15. Therefore, the parties request that this matter be stayed, entirely, in order to finalize 11 the agreement for one hundred and twenty (120) days. 12 16. This is the fifth submission request for extension of time to file responses to 13 Plaintiff’s Third Amended Complaint, and the first request to stay the entire proceeding. 15 Dated this 12th day of May, 2021 Dated this 12th day of May, 2021 TAKOS LAW GROUP, LTD. HAYES | WAKAYAMA 16 By: /s/ Zachary P. Takos, Esq. By: /s/ Dale A. Hayes, Jr., Esq. 17 ZACHARY P. TAKOS, ESQ. DALE A. HAYES, JR., ESQ. 18 Nevada Bar No. 11293 Nevada Bar No. 9056 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 300 LIANE K. WAKAYAMA, ESQ. 19 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Nevada Bar No. 11313 JEREMY D. HOLMES, ESQ. 20 PARR BROWN GEE & LOVELESS Nevada Bar No. 14379 JONATHAN O. HAFEN, ESQ 4735 S. Durango Drive, Ste. 105 21 Admitted pro hac vice Las Vegas, Nevada 89147 Admitted pro hac vice Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter 23 STEPHEN C. MOURITSEN, ESQ. Academies d/b/a American Preparatory Admitted pro hac vice Academy – Las Vegas 24 101 South 200 East, Suite 700 25 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111

26 Attorneys for Plaintiff American Preparatory Schools, Inc. 27 / / / 28 5 Dated this 12™ day of May, 2021 Dated this 12" day of May, 2021

4 || By:_/s/Lisa J. Zastrow, Esq. By:_/s/ Kenneth E. Hogan, Esq. JOSEPH P. GARIN, ESQ. KENNETH E. HOGAN, ESQ. 5 Nevada Bar No. 6653 Nevada Bar No. 10083 LISA J. ZASTROW, ESQ. 1140 N. Town Center, Ste. 200 6 Nevada Bar No. 9727 Las Vegas, Nevada 89144 7 9900 Covington Cross Drive, Suite 120 Las Vegas, Nevada 89144 Attorneys for Defendant Rachelle Hulet 8 Attorneys for Defendant Nevada Charter 9 Academies d/b/a American Preparatory 10 Academy — Las Vegas 12 3 Based on the parties' stipulation [ECF No. 96] and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY 8 ORDERED that THIS ACTION IS STAYED for all purposes thorough September 9, 2021. £=8 14 || And because this action and all deadlines are stayed, the stipulation to extend time to respond to the third amended complaint [ECF No. 93] is DENIED as moot. REE 1S Choe : 5

BS 16 U.S. District Judge Yerinifer Ax Dorsey A 7 Dated: May 13, 2021 = 18 H 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 4

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

American Preparatory Schools, Inc. v. Nevada Charter Academies, (D. Nev. 2021).

American Preparatory Schools, Inc. v. Nevada Charter Academies (American Preparatory Schools, Inc. v. Nevada Charter Academies) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.