Ansara v. Maldonado

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedApril 14, 2020
Docket2:19-cv-01394
StatusUnknown

This text of Ansara v. Maldonado (Ansara v. Maldonado) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Nevada primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ansara v. Maldonado, (D. Nev. 2020).

Opinion

1 BENJAMIN CLOWARD, ESQ.

2 Nevada Bar No. 11087 SAMANTHA A. MARTIN, ESQ. 3 Nevada Bar No. 12998 RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM 5 801 South Fourth Street 6 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: (702) 444-4444 7 Fax: (702) 444-4455 E-Mail: SMartin@richardharrislaw.com 8 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 9 UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 ROBERT ANSARA, as Special ) CASE NO.: 2:19-CV-01394-GMN-VCF 12 Administrator of the estate of D.B., born ) 13 December 18, 2015 and died August 15, ) STIPULATION AND ORDER TO 2017 and GABRIELLE BRANON- ) EXTEND DISCOVERY (First Request) 14 CHESLEY, individually, as the Natural ) Mother of D.B., DAVID BANKS, ) 15 individually and as the Natural Father of ) 16 D.B., ) ) 17 Plaintiffs, ) ) 18 v. ) 19 ) GLORIA MALDONADO, individually; ) 20 AUDRA GUITERREZ/GUERRO, ) individually; RICHARD WHITLEY, 21 Director of the Nevada Department of ) ) Health and Human Services, individually; 22 ) ROSS ARMSTRONG, Administrator of ) 23 Nevada Division of Child and Family ) Services, individually; YOLANDA KING, 24 Clark County Manager, individually, TIM ) ) BURCH, Director of Clark County 25 ) Department of Family Services, ) 26 individually; DIAMOND FOR, ) individually; CRAIG DICKENS; 27 individually; DOE individuals I-XX; ROE ) ) CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF 28 ) FAMILY SERVICES EMPLOYEES I-XX, 1 individually and in their official capacities; ) 1 CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ) 2 FAMILY SERVICES; COUNTY OF ) CLARK, a political subdivision of the State ) 3 of Nevada; TROPICANA DE, LLC, d/b/a ) SIEGAL SUITES OF TROPICANA, a ) 5 Foreign Limited Liability Corporation; ) 6 AND DOE SECURITY COMPANY and ) ZOE CORPORATIONS XXI-XXX, ) 7 ) Defendants. ) 8 ___________________________________ 9 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties that discovery shall be 10 extended ninety (90) days. 11 This litigation arose out of a wrongful death that occurred on August 15, 2017. Plaintiffs 12 filed their original Complaint on August 14, 2019. A First Amended Complaint was filed on 13 August 15, 2019. Defendant Topicana DE, LLC filed their Motion to Dismiss on September 9, 14 2019. Defendant Richard Whitley filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 24, 2019. Defendants 15 Clark County, Gloria Maldonado, Audra Gutierrez/Guerro, Yolanda King and Tim Burch filed 16 their Joinder to Richard Whitley’s Motion to Dismiss; and Separate Motion to Dismiss on October 17 31, 2019. 18 The parties agree that an additional ninety (90) days are needed to disclose experts and 19 complete discovery. 20 I. Discovery Completed to Date 21 1. The parties have disclosed their initial NRCP 16.1 disclosures. 22 23 2. Plaintiffs served written discovery to Defendant Tropicana De, LLC on February 12, 24 2020. 25 26 3. Plaintiffs served written discovery to Defendant Clark County on February 12, 2020 27 4. Plaintiffs served written discovery to Defendant Richard Whitely on April 10, 2020. 28 2 5. Defendant Richard Whitely served written discovery to Plaintiff Robert Ansara on 1 2 December 6, 2019. Plaintiff responded on January 10, 2020. 3 6. Defendant Richard Whitley served Request for Admission to Plaintiff David Banks 5 6 on February 28, 2020. Plaintiff responded on March 1, 2020. 7 8 II. Description of Additional Proposed Discovery 9 The parties discussed what additional discovery needs to be completed in this matter. It 10 was determined that, in order to fully litigate and investigate all alleged claims and 11 defenses, the parties needed to engage in the following: 12 1. Depositions of parties and witnesses. 13 2. Retention of experts. 14 3. Disclosure of all experts and their reports as well as depositions of the same. 15 Proposed Schedule for Completing All Remaining Discovery 16 The parties wish to extend the dates for discovery as follows; 17 Current Dates Proposed Dates 18 Last day to amend pleadings or add parties July 18, 2019 Same 19 Last day to serve Initial Expert Disclosures July 17, 2020 October 15, 2020 20 Last day to serve Rebuttal Expert Disclosures September 15, 2020 November 13, 2020 21 Last day to complete discovery October 16, 2020 January 14, 2021 22 Last day to file dispositive motions November 15, 2020 February 12, 2021 23 Joint Pretrial Order March 12, 2021 If dispositive motions are filed, the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended 24 until 30 days after decision on the dispositive motions or further court order. III. Reasons Why Good Cause Exists to Extend Expert Discovery Deadlines 25 FRCP 16(b)(5) provides that the scheduling order “shall not be modified” except upon 26 a showing of good cause. The purpose of this rule is “to offer a measure of certainty in pretrial 27 proceedings, ensuring that at some point both the parties and pleadings will be fixed.” Nutton v. 28 3 1 Sunset Station, Inc., Nev. Adv. Rep. 34, 357 P.3d 966, 971 (Nev. App. 2015). Good cause is 2 established by showing that the current deadline cannot be met despite the requesting party’s 3 diligence in attempting to meet said deadline. Diligence in attempting to meet a deadline may be 5 determined by considering the explanation for the untimely conduct; the importance of the 6 requested untimely action; the potential prejudice in allowing the untimely conduct; and the 7 availability of a continuance to cure such prejudice. Id. at 971-72. 8 The parties have had difficulty getting answers to discovery, including because as some 9 of the individuals and organizations involved in this lawsuit are either county and State entities 10 or employees which are currently shut down some of whom have been ordered to stay home as 11 nonessential and/or are working remotely making access to documents and participating in 12 discovery difficult as a result of the COVID-19 quarantine. Additionally, although the parties 13 have been diligently trying to conduct discovery and schedule depositions, their good faith efforts 14 have been frustrated because of the current quarantine. This request is not being made in an 15 attempt to delay the litigation of this matter but instead is being requested as a result of the current 16 global pandemic and the party’s inability to fully litigate the claim at this time. A brief extension 17 of time for discovery will allow the parties and their counsel to fully litigate this matter, taking 18 into account the delays caused by quarantine. 19 20 21 Date:_April 14, 2020________________ Date:_April 14, 2020_____________ RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM THE SIEGEL GROUP 22 23 /s/ Samantha A. Martin /s/ Brandon J. Trout 24 _____________________________ ____________________________ SAMANTHA A. MARTIN, ESQ. Jean Paul Hendricks, Esq. 25 Nevada Bar No. 12998 Brandon J. Trout, Esq. 26 801 South Fourth Street 3790 Paradise Road, Suite 250 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 27 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendant 28 Leslie Ortega and Faith Hubbard Tropicana DE, LLC 4 Date:_April 14, 2020 Date:_April 14, 2020 OLSON, CANNON, GORMLEY & NEVADA ATTORNEY 2 | STOBERSKI GENERAL’S OFFICE 3 | /s/ Felicia Gatali /s/ Linda C. Anderson ° Felicia Galati, Esq. Izaac Rowe, Esq. 6 Nevada Bar No. 7341 Nevada Bar No. 13947 9950 West Cheyenne Avenue Linda C. Anderson, Esq. 7 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 Nevada Bar No. 4090 8 Attorneys for Defendants 555 East Washington Avenue Clark County, Gloria Maldonado, Suite 3900 9 | Audra Guitierrez/Guerro, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Yolanda King And Tim Burch Attorneys for Defendant Richard 10 Whitley ll 12 13 14 15 6 IT 15 SO ORDERED.

9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DATED: 4-14-2020 20 □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ansara v. Maldonado, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ansara-v-maldonado-nvd-2020.