BGC Partners, Inc. v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc.

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided March 30, 2020·No. 2:15-cv-00531·Unknown

Opinion

1 Todd L. Bice, Esq., Bar No. 4534 Pisanelli Bice PLLC 2 400 South 7th Street, Suite 300 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 3 Telephone: (702) 214-2100 4 Facsimile: (702) 214-2101 tlb@pisanellibice.com 5 F. Thomas Hecht 6 Tina B. Solis Seth A. Horvath 7 Nixon Peabody LLP 8 70 W. Madison Street, Suite 3500 Chicago, Illinois 60602 9 Telephone: (312) 977-4400 Facsimile: (844) 560-8137 10 fthecht@nixonpeabody.com tbsolis@nixonpeabody.com 11 sahorvath@nixonpeabody.com 12 (admitted pro hac vice) 13 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Newmark Group Inc., G&E Acquisition Company LLC, and 14 BGC Real Estate of Nevada LLC 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 16 17 NEWMARK GROUP INC., G&E Case No. 2:15–cv–00531–RFB–EJY ACQUISITION COMPANY LLC, and 18 BGC REAL ESTATE OF NEVADA LLC, 19 Plaintiffs, PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PARTICIPATE BY CELLULAR 20 vs. PHONE AT THE APRIL 6, 2020, HEARING 21 AVISON YOUNG (CANADA) INC.; AVISON YOUNG (USA) INC.; AVISON (Emergency Motion) 22 YOUNG–NEVADA LLC, MARK ROSE, THE NEVADA COMMERCIAL GROUP, 23 JOHN PINJUV, and JOSEPH KUPIEC; DOES 1 through 5; and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES 24 6 through 10, 25 Defendants. 26 Plaintiffs Newmark Group Inc., G&E Acquisition Company LLC, and BGC Real Estate 27 of Nevada LLC (together, “Plaintiffs”), through their counsel, move this Court under LR 7-4 for 28 1 the entry of an order allowing them to participate by cellular phone at the April 6, 2020, 2 telephonic hearing in this matter. In support of this motion, Plaintiffs submit the following 3 memorandum of points and authorities: 4 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 5 On March 23, 2020, the Court entered an order setting an April 6 telephonic hearing on 6 7 two of Plaintiffs’ motions to compel. (ECF No. 318.) The order states: “The use of a cell phone or 8 speaker phone during the call is prohibited. The call must be made using a land line.” (Id.) 9 On March 25, 2020, Defendants filed an emergency motion seeking leave for two of their 10 attorneys to appear telephonically by cellular phone at the April 6 hearing. (ECF No. 319.) On 11 March 26, 2020, the Court granted Defendants’ motion. (ECF No. 323.) 12 Plaintiffs likewise seek leave for their counsel to participate telephonically by cellular 13 phone at the April 6 hearing. Tina Solis and Seth Horvath, who are admitted pro hac vice in this 14 15 matter, live and work in the Chicago area. As a result of the COVID-19 outbreak, Illinois 16 residents are subject to the travel restrictions set forth in Executive Order 2020-10, issued by the 17 Governor of Illinois on March 20, 2020. See Exec. Order 2020-10 https://www2.illinois.gov/Page 18 s/Executive-Orders/ExecutiveOrder2020-10.aspx (Mar. 20, 2020). Obtaining access to a land line 19 for purposes of the April 6 hearing would require travel to and from the offices of Nixon Peabody 20 LLP, Plaintiffs’ counsel’s law firm. (See Ex. 1, Solis Decl., ¶¶ 8–12.) 21 To avoid unnecessary travel under the current circumstances, Plaintiffs request leave for 22 23 their counsel to participate telephonically by cellular phone, rather than by land line, at the April 24 6 hearing. The court has the inherent authority to grant this request. See United States v. Urena, 25 659 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2011). Plaintiffs’ counsel will take all reasonable measures within 26 their control to ensure that their cellular-phone connections remain clear and uninterrupted during 27 the course of the hearing. 28 1 This motion qualifies as an emergency since it involves compliance with the Court’s 2 | March 23 order, it cannot be addressed within the standard briefing schedule in LR 7-2(b), and it 3 arises from COVID-19 travel restrictions. 4 Plaintiffs’ counsel have conferred with Defendants’ counsel about the relief requested in 5 6 this motion. Defendants’ counsel have no objection. (/d., 4] 16.) 7 CONCLUSION 8 FOR THESE REASONS, Plaintiffs respectfully request the entry of an order allowing 9 || their counsel to participate by cellular phone at the April 6 telephonic hearing in this matter. 10 || Dated: March 27, 2020 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Tina B. Solis 12 Todd L. Bice, Esq., Bar No. 4534 13 Pisanelli Bice PLLC 400 South 7th Street, Suite 300 14 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: (702) 214-2100 15 Facsimile: (702) 214-2101 16 tlb @ pisanellibice.com F, Thomas Hecht Tina B. Solis 18 Seth A. Horvath Nixon Peabody LLP 19 70 W. Madison Street, Suite 3500 20) Chicago, Illinois 60602 Telephone: (312) 977-4400 fthecht @ nixonpeabody.com 22 tbsolis@ nixonpeabody.com sahorvath @ nixonpeabody.com 23 (admitted pro hac vice) 24 UNITED) STA M STRATE JUDGE Attorneys for Plaintiffs Newmark Group Inc., 25 G&E Acquisition Company LLC, and Dated: March 30, 2020 BGC Real Estate of Nevada LLC 26 27 28 -3-

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

BGC Partners, Inc. v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc., (D. Nev. 2020).

BGC Partners, Inc. v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc. (BGC Partners, Inc. v. Avison Young (Canada), Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Urena
659 F.3d 903 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)