Arreola v. C.R. England, Inc.

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: March 12, 2024
• Docket: 2:23-cv-00742
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

NEWILSONELSER 2 WILSON ELSER MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & DICKER LLP MICHAEL P. LOWRY, ESQ. 3 || Nevada Bar No. 10666 E-mail: Michael.Lowry @ wilsonelser.com 4 6689 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 200 Las Vegas, NV 89119 5 || Tel: 702.727.1400/Fax: 702.727.1401 6 Attorneys for Jovon Byrde, C.R. England, Inc.

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 10 Jennifer Arreola, individually, Case No.: 2:23-cv-742 Plaintiff, 11 Stipulation and Order Dismissing VS. Claims and Defenses B C.R. England, Inc.; Jovon Byrde, individually; and Does 1 to 100, Roe Corporation | to 100, inclusive, ECF No. 32 14 Defendants. 15 16 The operative complaint contains causes of action for 1) negligence; 2) negligent 17 || entrustment; 3) negligent hiring; 4) negligent training and supervision; and 5) negligent retention. 18 || Defendants have both admitted Byrde was within the course and scope of his employment with 19 || C.R. England when the events alleged in the complaint occurred. Plaintiffs negligence cause 20 || action is defined by state law. “To prevail on a negligence theory, a plaintiff generally must show 21 || that: (1) the defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff; (2) the defendant breached that duty; 22 || (3) the breach was the legal cause of the plaintiff’s injury; and (4) the plaintiff suffered damages.’”! 23 || Both defendants admitted Byrde owed a duty and breached it, but contest the remaining elements 24 || of negligence. 25 The parties now stipulate to dismiss the following causes of action: 2) negligent 26 || entrustment; 3) negligent hiring; 4) negligent training and supervision; and 5) negligent retention. 27 || They further stipulate to dismiss the following affirmative defenses with prejudice: 1) Plaintiff 28 ' Bower v. Harrah's Laughlin, Inc., 125 Nev. 470, 491, 215 P.3d 709, 724 (2009).

1 || was comparatively negligent; 2) Defendant Byrde encountered a sudden emergency; 3) The event 2 || alleged in the complaint was caused by an intervening, superseding cause; and 4) The event 3 || alleged in the complaint was solely caused by a non-party, thereby leaving 5) Plaintiff did not 4 || mitigate damages as the only remaining affirmative defense. These causes of action and 5 || affirmative defenses are dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear its own fees and costs as to 6 || the dismissed matters. 7 Dated this 6" day of March, 2024. Dated this 6" day of March, 2024.

>) “NEWILSONELSER NAQVIINIURY LAW 10 WILSOM BL388 MOSKOWITZ EDELMAN & GICKER LLP /s/ Michael Lowry és/ Paul G_ Albright 11 Michael P. Lowry, Esq. Paul G. Albright, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 10666 Nevada Bar No. 14159 12 Attorneys for Jovon Byrde, C.R. England, Attorneys for Jennifer Arreola Inc. 13 14 15 ORDER 16 7 Based on the parties’ stipulation [ECF No. 32] and good cause appearing, IT IS SO

8 ORDERED. This case proceeds on plaintiff's lone remaining negligence claim, and only as to the

19 elements of causation and damages.

USS. DistrickJu be Jennifer A. Dorsey 71 Dated: March 12,2024 — 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 rf