Burke v. Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedFebruary 26, 2024
Docket3:23-cv-00184
StatusUnknown

This text of Burke v. Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC (Burke v. Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC) 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
Burke v. Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC, (D. Nev. 2024).

Opinion

1 | HONE LAW Eric D. Hone, NV Bar No. 8499 2 echone@hone.law Leslie A. S. Godfrey, NV Bar No. 10229 3 || lgodfrey@hone.law 701 N. Green Valley Parkway, Suite 200 4 || Henderson, NV 89074 Phone 702-608-3720 5||Fax 702-608-7814 6 || Attorneys for Defendant/Counterclaimant 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA DONALD J. BURKE, a Nevada resident; Case No. 3:23-CV-00184-MMD-CSD and DONALD W. BURKE, a Nevada 10 || resident, 11 Plaintiffs, Vv. STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY 12 AGREEMENT AND LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER 13 || NEVADA, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; KILEY RANCH SIX APARTMENTS, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; LUKE DRAGOVICH, a 15 |] Nevada resident, and DOES 1 through 10; and ROE CORPORATIONS 1 through 10, 16 Defendants. 17 LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF || NEVADA, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; KILEY RANCH SIX || APARTMENTS, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; LUKE DRAGOVICH, a 20 || Nevada resident, 21 Counterclaimants, v. 22 DONALD J. BURKE, a Nevada resident; 23 ||and DONALD W. BURKE, a Nevada resident, 24 Counterdefendants. 25 26 Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC (“Lewis”), Kiley Ranch Six Apartments, 27||LLC (“Kiley Ranch”) and Luke Dragovich (“Dragovich’”) and, collectively, 28 || (‘Defendants/Counterclaimants” or “Lewis”) by and through their counsel of record, Hone Law,

1 ]and Donald J. Burke and Donald W. Burke, (“Burke Parties” or “Plaintiffs”), by and through 2 ||counsel, the law firm of Clarke Law P.C. collectively referred to herein as the “Parties” and 3 || individually as a “Party”, have agreed to and have submitted to the Court, and for good cause 4 ||shown the Court hereby enters the following Protective Order: 5 The Court, finding good cause for entry of a protective order pursuant to FRCP 26(c) and || FRCP 29(b), and hereby ORDERS that: 7 \1. APPLICABILITY OF THIS PROTECTIVE ORDER 8 Subject to Section 2 below, this Protective Order governs the handling of documents, 9 || electronically stored data, depositions, deposition exhibits, interrogatory responses, responses to 10 |]requests for admissions, responses to requests for production of documents, and all other 11 || discovery obtained pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or other legal process by or 12 || from, or produced on behalf of, a Party, non-party, or witness in connection with this action (this 13 |] information hereinafter shall be referred to as “Discovery Material”). As used herein, “Producing |] Party” or “Disclosing Party” shall refer to the Parties and nonparties that give testimony or 15 |] produce documents or other information in connection with this action; “Receiving Party” shall 16 ||refer to the Parties in this action that receive such information, and “Authorized Recipient” shall 17 ||refer to any person or entity authorized by Section 11 of this Protective Order to obtain access to 18 || Confidential Information or Highly Confidential Information as defined in Section 5, or the 19 ||contents of such Discovery Material. 20 II. NO WAIVER 21 This Protective Order is entered solely for the purpose of facilitating the exchange of 22 || documents and information among the Parties to this action without involving the Court 23 || unnecessarily in the process. Nothing in this Protective Order, nor the production of any 24 || information or document under the terms of this Protective Order, nor any proceedings pursuant 25 ||to this Protective Order, shall be deemed to be a waiver of any rights or objections to challenge 26 || the authenticity or admissibility of any document, testimony, or other evidence at trial. 27 || Additionally, this Protective Order will not prejudice the right of any Party or nonparty to oppose //

] || production of any information on the ground of attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, 2 }or any other privilege or protection provided under the law. 3 | TI. DESIGNATION OF INFORMATION 4 Any Producing Party may designate Discovery Material that is in its possession, custody, 5 ||or control produced to a Receiving Party as “CONFIDENTIAL” or “HIGHLY 6 |} CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY” under the terms of this Protective Order if the 7 || Producing Party in good faith reasonably believes that such Discovery Material contains 8 ||nonpublic, confidential information as defined in Section 5 below. oO} IV. EXERCISE OF RESTRAINT AND CARE IN DESIGNATING MATERIAL FOR PROTECTION 10 Each Producing Party that designates information or items for protection under this 1] || Protective Order must take care to limit any such designation to specific material that qualifies 12 || under the appropriate standards. Indiscriminate designations are prohibited. 13]/V. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION 14 For purposes of this Protective Order, “Confidential Information” means information that 15 || constitutes, reflects, or discloses nonpublic information, trade secrets, or other know-how, 16||research, development, or financial, proprietary, commercially sensitive, confidential business, 17 accounting, marketing, regulatory, strategic information (including business plans, negotiations, 18 || strategies, or decisions, scientific and technical information, and nonpublic designs), information 19 || about existing and potential customers, the disclosure of which the Producing Party believes in 20 || good faith might reasonably result in economic, competitive, or business injury to the Producing 21 || Party (or its parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, personnel, or clients) and which is not publicly 22 || known and cannot be ascertained from an imspection of publicly available sources, documents, 23 || material, or devices. “Confidential Information” shall also include sensitive personal information 24 || that is not otherwise publicly available, such as home addresses; social security numbers; dates 25 || of birth; employment personnel files; home telephone records/numbers; employee disciplinary 26 || records; earnings statements; tax records; and other similar personal financial information. 27TH 8iy//

1 “Highly Confidential Information” is any Confidential Information as defined above, the 2 disclosure of which would create a substantial risk of economic, competitive, or business injury 3 || to the Producing Party. VI. | DESIGNATING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL 5 INFORMATION 6 If any Party in this action determines in good faith that any information, documents, 7\\things or responses produced in the course of discovery in this action should be designated as 8 || Confidential Information or Highly Confidential Information (the “Designating Party’’), it shall 9 advise any party receiving such material of this fact, and all copies of such document, things, or 10 ||responses, or portions thereof deemed to be confidential shall be marked “CONFIDENTIAL” or 11|“HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY” (whether produced in hard copy 12 |}or electronic form) at the expense of the Designating Party and treated as such by all Parties. A 13 || Designating Party may inform another Party that a document is Confidential or Highly 14 || Confidential by providing the Bates number of the document in writing.

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

Related

United States v. Ortiz
447 F.3d 28 (First Circuit, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Burke v. Lewis Investment Company of Nevada, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burke-v-lewis-investment-company-of-nevada-llc-nvd-2024.