Brown v. Tromba

Opinion

District Attorney State Bar No. 001565 By: JEFFREY S. ROGAN Deputy District Attorney State Bar No. 010734 500 South Grand Central Pkwy. 5th Flr. Las Vegas, Nevada 89155-2215 Telephone: (702) 455-4761 Fax: (702) 382-5178 E-Mail: Jeffrey.Rogan@ClarkCountyDA.com Attorneys for Defendants Clark County, the Clark County District Attorney’s Office, and Steve Wolfson

Marlon Lorenzo Brown, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No: 2:17-cv-02396-APG-BNW ) vs. ) ) City Of Las Vegas, Nevada; Las Vegas ) STIPULATION TO STAY Metropolitan Police Department ) DISCOVERY (LVMPD); Clark County; Clark County ) District Attorney’s Office; Steve ) WOLFSON; Danae Adams; Bruce Nelson; ) Joseph Lombardo; Dante Tromba; Does ) and Roes 1-20, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Defendants Clark County, the Clark County District Attorney’s Office, and Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson (the “County Defendants”); the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and Dante Trombe (“LVMPD Defendants”); and Marlon Lorenzo Brown (“Plaintiff”), hereby stipulate as follows: 1) Discovery shall be stayed pending ruling on the County Defendants’ and LVMPD Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss, [ECF Nos. 101 and 105], subject to potential lifting of the stay upon terms and conditions that the parties and the court deem just; 2) A stay is necessary because these pending Motions involve issues of immunity and adequacy of pleading allegations, and resolution of these Motions does not require further 1 discovery. Pilger v. Mosley, No. 2:18-cv-00854-JAD-PAL, 2018 WL 5268605, at *2 (D. Ne 2 Oct. 23, 2018) (“The Supreme Court has squarely held that until the threshold issue « 3 immunity is resolved, discovery should not proceed.”). A stay of discovery at this time wi 4 ||align with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1, which declares that the Rules “should | 5 construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the jus 6 speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.” 7 3) The discovery stay shall include all discovery previously served but for which r 8 response has been made; 9 4) The parties agree that any responses to any outstanding discovery will be made withi fourteen (14) days of the Court’s ruling on any applicable Motion to Dismiss; if necessary. 5) The parties will submit a new proposed Discovery Plan to the Court within fourtee (14) days of the Court’s ruling on the last filed Motion to Dismiss and the stay will be lifte The new discovery plan will include extended deadlines to designate experts, condu discovery, and file dispositive motions. DATED this 15th day of July, 2022. KAEMPFER CROWELL MCAVOY AMAYA & REVERO By: s/Kristopher J. Kalkowski By: s/Michael J. McAvoy-Amaya LYSSA S. ANDERSON MICHAEL J. McAVOY-AMAYA Nevada Bar No. 5781 Nevada Bar No. 14082 KRISTOPHER J. KALKOWSKI TIMOTHY E. REVERO Nevada Bar No. 14892 Nevada Bar No. 14603 1980 Festival Plaza Drive 400 S. 4th St., Ste. 500 Suite 650 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Devartment and Dante Tromba ORDER 11 CLARK COUNTY IT IS SO ORDERED DATED: 3:56 pm, July 18, 2022 By: 4 Jeffrey S. Rogan JEFFREY S. ROGAN bao Deputy District Attorney Sr BNE Nevada Bar No. 010734 BRENDA WEKSLER 500 South Grand Central Pkwy. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Las Vegas, Nevada 89155-2215 Attorney for Defendants Clark 8 County, the Clark County District Attorney’s Office, and Steve Wolfson