Crane v. Clark County

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedJuly 25, 2023
Docket2:23-cv-00925
StatusUnknown

This text of Crane v. Clark County (Crane v. Clark County) 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
Crane v. Clark County, (D. Nev. 2023).

Opinion

1 SDTisEtrVicEt NA tBto. rWneOy LFSON 2 CIVIL DIVISION State Bar No. 001565 3 By: JEFFREY S. ROGAN Deputy District Attorney 4 State Bar No. 010734 By: JOEL K. BROWNING 5 Deputy District Attorney State Bar No. 014489 6 500 South Grand Central Pkwy. Las Vegas, Nevada 89155-2215 7 (702) 455-4761 Fax (702) 382-5178 8 E-Mail: Jeffrey.Rogan@ClarkCountyDA.com E-Mail: Joel.Browning@ClarkCountyDA.com 9 Attorneys for Clark County and Clark County District Attorney Defendants

10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA

12 STANLEY RANDOLPH CRANE, an ) individual, ) 13 ) Case No: 2:23-cv-00925 -CDS -BNW )

14 Plaintiff, ) )

) DEFENDANTS’ VERIFIED 15 vs. ) MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF

) TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE TO 16 CLARK COUNTY, a political subdivision ) PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT organized under the law of the State of ) 17 Nevada; DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, ) 18 a political subdivision organized under the law ) of the State of Nevada; DISTRICT ) ) 19 ATTORNEY STEVEN WOLFSON, an ) individual; DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ) 20 MELANIE H. MARLAND, an individual; ) 21 DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ) ) WILLIAM J. MERBACK, an individual; ) 22 DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SKYLER ) SULLIVAN, an individual; DEPUTY ) 23 DISTRICT ATTORNEY BRITTNI LEIGH ) ) 24 GRIFFITH, an individual; DEPUTY ) DISTRICT ATTORNEY PARKER BROOKS, ) 25 an individual, and DOES I through X, ) inclusive, ) 26 ) 27 Defendant. ) ) ) 1 COME NOW Defendants CLARK COUNTY, CLARK COUNTY DISTRICT 2 ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, STEVEN B. WOFLSON, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 3 MELANIE H. MARLAND, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY WILLIAM J. MERBACK, 4 DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY SKYLER SULLIVAN, DEPUTY DISTRICT 5 ATTORNEY BRITTNI LEIGH GRIFFITH, and DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 6 PARKER BROOKS (hereinafter collectively “Defendants”), through their attorney District 7 Attorney STEVEN B. WOLFSON, by Deputy District Attorney JOEL K. BROWNING, and 8 hereby move this Court for an extension of time to answer or file a responsive motion to 9 Plaintiff’s complaint. 10 This Motion is based upon all the pleadings and papers on file herein, the attached 11 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, and the oral arguments of counsel at the time of the 12 hearing in this matter, if any. 13 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 14 I. 15 NATURE OF MOTION 16 On or around July 19, 2023, this case was unexpectedly assigned to the undersigned 17 due to case shuffling in the wake of a sudden leave of absence for an attorney in our office. 18 Counsel for Defendants reached out to Plaintiff’s counsel immediately and requested an 19 extension of time to respond to the complaint until August 7, 2023, to give the undersigned 20 sufficient time to review the complaint, speak to the respective defendants, and prepare an 21 answer and/or responsive motion. See correspondence between counsel, attached hereto as 22 Exhibit A. 23 The undersigned also agreed to not file a motion to quash for the individual deputy 24 district attorneys which had been improperly served and to waive service for any individual 25 deputy district attorneys who were improperly served or yet to be served in exchange for an 26 extension and in the interests of judicial economy. 27 Counsel for Plaintiff agreed and, in conferring with the Court, it was advised that the 1 Therefore, Defendants bring the instant motion for an extension of time to respond to 2 Plaintiff’s Complaint until August 7, 2023, and to memorialize the agreement between the 3 parties waiving service for Defendants DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MELANIE H. 4 MARLAND, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY WILLIAM J. MERBACK, DEPUTY 5 DISTRICT ATTORNEY SKYLER SULLIVAN, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY 6 BRITTNI LEIGH GRIFFITH, and DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY PARKER BROOKS. 7 The undersigned avers that the instant motion is not brought for an improper purpose, 8 to harass, to cause unnecessary delay, or to needlessly increase the cost of litigation. 9 II. 10 STANDARD OF REVIEW 11 “The district court's denial of an extension of time pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 12 Procedure 6(b) is reviewed for abuse of discretion.” Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 13 F.3d 1253, 1258 (9th Cir. 2010). 14 “Requests for extensions of time made before the applicable deadline has passed should 15 ‘normally ... be granted in the absence of bad faith on the part of the party seeking relief or 16 prejudice to the adverse party.’” Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th 17 Cir. 2010) (citing 4B Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure 18 § 1165 (3d ed. 2004)). 19 III. 20 LEGAL ARGUMENT 21 A. Defendants sought an Extension of Time Prior to the Deadline, their Request 22 for an Extension is not Made in Bad Faith, and Plaintiffs will not be 23 Prejudiced by an Extension 24 “Requests for extensions of time made before the applicable deadline has passed should 25 ‘normally ... be granted in the absence of bad faith on the part of the party seeking relief or 26 prejudice to the adverse party.’” Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th 27 Cir. 2010) (citing 4B Charles Alan Wright & Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure 1 Here Defendants requested an extension of time prior to the deadline to respond to tk 2 |}complaint and did so for good cause due to unforeseen circumstances. Furthermore, ; 3 || Defendants are also willing to waive service, Plaintiff is not prejudiced, and the interests « 4 || judicial economy are furthered by this extension. 5 Therefore, the Honorable Court should grant Defendants’ Motion for an Extension « 6 || Time to Respond to the Complaint until August 7, 2023. 7 IV. 8 CONCLUSION 9 Based on the foregoing, Defendants humbly request the Honorable Court grant an 10 || extension of time to respond to Plaintiff's complaint until August 7, 2023. 11 DATED this 24" day of July 2023. 12 STEVEN B. WOLFSON 13 DISTRICT ATTORNEY 14 By: /s/Joel K. Browning 15 JEFFREY S. ROGAN Deputy District Attorney 16 State Bar No. 010734 JOEL K. BROWNING 17 Deputy District Attorney State Bar No. 014489 18 500 South Grand Central Pkwy. Las Vegas, Nevada 89155-2215 19 Attorney for Clark County and Clark County District Attorney Defendants 20 21 ORDER 22 IT IS SO ORDERED 23 DATED: 9:57 pm, July 25, 2023 24 Lar Are b—tn, 25 BRENDA WEKSLER 26 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 27 28

1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 2 I certify that I am an employee of the Office of the Clark County District Attorney and 3 that on this 24th day of July, 2023 I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing 4 DEFENDANTS’ VERIFIED MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A 5 RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT through CM/ECF Electronic Filing system 6 of the United States District Court for the District of Nevada (or, if necessary, by U.S. Mail, 7 first class, postage pre-paid), upon the following: 8 CRAIG A. MULLER, ESQ. 9 MULLER & ASSOCIATES, INC. 808 S. 7TH Street 10 Las Vegas, NV 89101 Attorney for Plaintiff 11 electronicservice@craigmuellerlaw.com

13 /s/Patricia C. Villa An Employee of the Clark County District 14 Attorney’s Office – Civil Division

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 EXHIBIT A

(Correspondence) FTroo:m: SJouesli eB rWowarnding Cc: Patricia Villa; Charles Lobello Subject: RE: Crane v. Clark County, et al. RE: Introduction and Request for an Extension / Case No. 2:23-cv-00925 Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 10:45:43 AM Importance: High CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use caution before opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email. Do not sign-in with your DA account credentials. Joel,

I called the clerk, the extension needs to be done by a motion.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Crane v. Clark County, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crane-v-clark-county-nvd-2023.