1 | |MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE, Nevada Bar No. 10931 PIETER M. O’LEARY, Nevada Bar No. 15297 ||LEO S. WOLPERT, Nevada Bar No. 12658 3 | |MCLETCHIE LAW 602 South Tenth Street 4 | |Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702) 728-5300 5 | |Fax: (702) 425-8220 6 | |Email: maggie@nvlitigation.com Counsel for Plaintiff 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 ALEXANDRIA DEVORE, an individual, Case. No.: 2:22-cv-01045-CDS-BNW 10 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO vs. FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT 12 AND EXTEND DISCOVERY LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 13 | |DEPARTMENT, a municipal corporation; 14 SHERIFF JOSEPH LOMBARDO, an individual; LIEUTENANT KURT 15 | |MCKENZIE, an individual, UNKNOWN OFFICERS 1-12, individuals, 16 17 Defendants. 18 Plaintiff ALEXANDRIA DEVORE and _ Defendants LAS VEGAS |METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, SHERIFF JOSEPH LOMBARDO, and 20 | |LIEUTENANT KURT MCKENZIE, by and through their respective counsel, hereby 21 | |stipulate and agree to the following: 22 I]. AMENDMENT OF COMPLAINT. 23 1. Plaintiff may file her First Amended Complaint, which adds two (2) additional 24 | |officers, add various state claims, clarify state law claims in the proposed First Amended 25 | |Complaint, add additional facts, and correct various misspellings and typographical errors. 26 | |See proposed First Amended Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 27 28
] 2. In stipulating to allow Plaintiff to file their First Amended Complaint, 2 | |Defendants do not waive any arguments and reserve the right to file a Motion to Dismiss the 3 | |First Amended Complaint upon the filing of First Amended Complaint is filed and served. 5 3. Due to additional parties and claims being raised in the First Amended 6 | |Complaint, the parties further agree to amend the discovery deadlines as follows. 7 A. PLAINTIFFS’ DISCOVERY.
9 1. Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 19 | |26-1(a)Q), dated October 3, 2022; 1 2. Plaintiff's Interrogatories to Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 12 Department — Set One, dated October 26, 2022; 13 3. Plaintiff's Request for Production to Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan 14 Police Department — Set One, dated October 28, 2022; 1S B. DEFENDANTS’ DISCOVERY. 1. LVMPD Defendants’ Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents 18 Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated October 3, 2022; 19 2. LVMPD Defendants’ First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and
Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated November 30, 2022; > 3. LVMPD Defendants’ Second Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and 9 Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated December 7, 2022; 53 4. LVMPD Defendants’ Answers to Plaintiff Alexandria Devore’s
Interrogatories — Set One, dated November 28, 2022; 95 5. LVMPD Defendants’ Answers to Plaintiff Alexandria Devore’s Request for Production — Set One, dated December 7, 2022; 27 28
1 Il. DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED. The Parties are actively conducting discovery. For the reasons explained below, the 3 Parties will need additional time to propound written discovery and conduct depositions. 4 5 II.SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF WHY EXTENSION IS NECESSARY. 6 This is the first request for an extension of discovery deadlines in this matter. The 7 | |Parties request that the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines be extended an 8 | |additional ninety (90) days so that the Parties may continue to conduct discovery. The Parties 9 acknowledge that, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, a stipulation to extend a deadline set forth in 10} Ja discovery plan must be submitted to the Court no later than twenty-one (21) days before 11 | the expiration of the subject deadline and must be supported by a showing of good cause. 12 | |The deadlines the Parties seek to extend are outside of the twenty-one (21) day window. 13 | |Here, there is good cause to extend the deadline. 14 The Parties respectfully request an extension of time to extend the discovery in this 15 | matter to enable to them to conduct necessary discovery in this matter and so that this matter 16 | Jis fairly resolved on the merits. “Good cause to extend a discovery deadline exists “if it cannot 17 reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Derosa v. Blood 18 | |Sys., Inc., No. 2:13-cv-0137-JCM-NIK, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108235, 2013 WL 3975764, 19) Jat 1 (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2013) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 20 | 1609 (9th Cir. 1992)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 (providing that the Rules of Civil Procedure 21 | |“should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the Parties to secure the 22 just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”). 23 The Parties have been diligently conducting discovery and continue to conduct 24 discovery but an extension is still needed to efficiently continue discovery and manage the 25 | |case. Plaintiffs recently filed their Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to substitute the 26 | |true names of two previously unnamed officers, which would add new Defendants to the 27 | case, and add six (6) new claims. Additionally, the Parties have met and conferred regarding 28 | Ia Stipulation and Order for Plaintiff to file the Amended Complaint. Given the recent
1 | Jidentification of officers involved in incidents set forth in the Complaint, the Parties require 2 | |additional time to conduct further discovery and investigate the matter. Finally, the Parties 3 | |together request this in good faith and to further the resolution of this complicated case on 4 | |the merits, and not for any purpose of delay. 5 Additionally, counsel for the Parties in this matter are litigating several other 6 | junrelated matters (including against each other) which have competing demands. While 7 | |competing demands of litigation are merely one of many reasons for the instant request, it 8 | |should be noted that the other litigation between the same counsel involving similar issues 9 | |can only benefit from the completion of discovery in this matter so that in other litigation, 10 | |similar requests can be expedited and can further the resolution of those matters and the 11 | interests of justice. Finally, counsel for the Parties are in the preliminary stages of settlement 12 | |discussions regarding this and other matters being litigated stemming from the Black Lives 13 | |Matter Protests. Thus, the standards to extend all requested deadlines is satisfied here. 14 Based on the foregoing stipulation and proposed deadlines plan, the Parties thus 15 | |respectfully request an extension of time to extend the discovery in this matter to enable to 16 | |them to conduct necessary discovery in this matter. 19 The Parties propose to add ninety (90) days to all current deadlines: 20 Add Parties
: 34 Disclosures
4 (If dispositive motions are filed, the
28 | |! Ninety (90) days after May 8, 2023, is Sunday, August 6, 2023.
1 deadline for shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision of the 9 dispositive motions or further order of the Court.) 3 4 >| 6) 8 9 | [DATED this 28" day of March, 2023. DATED this 28" day of March, 2023. 10) |MCLETCHIE LAW MARQUIS AURBACH 11 /s/ Margaret A. McLetchie /s/ Jackie V. Nichols 12 | |Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. (10931) Jackie V. Nichols (14246) Pieter M.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 | |MARGARET A. MCLETCHIE, Nevada Bar No. 10931 PIETER M. O’LEARY, Nevada Bar No. 15297 ||LEO S. WOLPERT, Nevada Bar No. 12658 3 | |MCLETCHIE LAW 602 South Tenth Street 4 | |Las Vegas, NV 89101 Telephone: (702) 728-5300 5 | |Fax: (702) 425-8220 6 | |Email: maggie@nvlitigation.com Counsel for Plaintiff 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 ALEXANDRIA DEVORE, an individual, Case. No.: 2:22-cv-01045-CDS-BNW 10 Plaintiffs, STIPULATION AND ORDER TO vs. FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT 12 AND EXTEND DISCOVERY LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 13 | |DEPARTMENT, a municipal corporation; 14 SHERIFF JOSEPH LOMBARDO, an individual; LIEUTENANT KURT 15 | |MCKENZIE, an individual, UNKNOWN OFFICERS 1-12, individuals, 16 17 Defendants. 18 Plaintiff ALEXANDRIA DEVORE and _ Defendants LAS VEGAS |METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, SHERIFF JOSEPH LOMBARDO, and 20 | |LIEUTENANT KURT MCKENZIE, by and through their respective counsel, hereby 21 | |stipulate and agree to the following: 22 I]. AMENDMENT OF COMPLAINT. 23 1. Plaintiff may file her First Amended Complaint, which adds two (2) additional 24 | |officers, add various state claims, clarify state law claims in the proposed First Amended 25 | |Complaint, add additional facts, and correct various misspellings and typographical errors. 26 | |See proposed First Amended Complaint attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 27 28
] 2. In stipulating to allow Plaintiff to file their First Amended Complaint, 2 | |Defendants do not waive any arguments and reserve the right to file a Motion to Dismiss the 3 | |First Amended Complaint upon the filing of First Amended Complaint is filed and served. 5 3. Due to additional parties and claims being raised in the First Amended 6 | |Complaint, the parties further agree to amend the discovery deadlines as follows. 7 A. PLAINTIFFS’ DISCOVERY.
9 1. Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents Pursuant to FRCP 19 | |26-1(a)Q), dated October 3, 2022; 1 2. Plaintiff's Interrogatories to Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 12 Department — Set One, dated October 26, 2022; 13 3. Plaintiff's Request for Production to Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan 14 Police Department — Set One, dated October 28, 2022; 1S B. DEFENDANTS’ DISCOVERY. 1. LVMPD Defendants’ Initial Disclosure of Witnesses and Documents 18 Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated October 3, 2022; 19 2. LVMPD Defendants’ First Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and
Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated November 30, 2022; > 3. LVMPD Defendants’ Second Supplemental Disclosure of Witnesses and 9 Documents Pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1), dated December 7, 2022; 53 4. LVMPD Defendants’ Answers to Plaintiff Alexandria Devore’s
Interrogatories — Set One, dated November 28, 2022; 95 5. LVMPD Defendants’ Answers to Plaintiff Alexandria Devore’s Request for Production — Set One, dated December 7, 2022; 27 28
1 Il. DISCOVERY THAT REMAINS TO BE COMPLETED. The Parties are actively conducting discovery. For the reasons explained below, the 3 Parties will need additional time to propound written discovery and conduct depositions. 4 5 II.SPECIFIC DESCRIPTION OF WHY EXTENSION IS NECESSARY. 6 This is the first request for an extension of discovery deadlines in this matter. The 7 | |Parties request that the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order deadlines be extended an 8 | |additional ninety (90) days so that the Parties may continue to conduct discovery. The Parties 9 acknowledge that, pursuant to Local Rule 26-3, a stipulation to extend a deadline set forth in 10} Ja discovery plan must be submitted to the Court no later than twenty-one (21) days before 11 | the expiration of the subject deadline and must be supported by a showing of good cause. 12 | |The deadlines the Parties seek to extend are outside of the twenty-one (21) day window. 13 | |Here, there is good cause to extend the deadline. 14 The Parties respectfully request an extension of time to extend the discovery in this 15 | matter to enable to them to conduct necessary discovery in this matter and so that this matter 16 | Jis fairly resolved on the merits. “Good cause to extend a discovery deadline exists “if it cannot 17 reasonably be met despite the diligence of the party seeking the extension.’” Derosa v. Blood 18 | |Sys., Inc., No. 2:13-cv-0137-JCM-NIK, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108235, 2013 WL 3975764, 19) Jat 1 (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2013) (quoting Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 20 | 1609 (9th Cir. 1992)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 (providing that the Rules of Civil Procedure 21 | |“should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the Parties to secure the 22 just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding”). 23 The Parties have been diligently conducting discovery and continue to conduct 24 discovery but an extension is still needed to efficiently continue discovery and manage the 25 | |case. Plaintiffs recently filed their Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint to substitute the 26 | |true names of two previously unnamed officers, which would add new Defendants to the 27 | case, and add six (6) new claims. Additionally, the Parties have met and conferred regarding 28 | Ia Stipulation and Order for Plaintiff to file the Amended Complaint. Given the recent
1 | Jidentification of officers involved in incidents set forth in the Complaint, the Parties require 2 | |additional time to conduct further discovery and investigate the matter. Finally, the Parties 3 | |together request this in good faith and to further the resolution of this complicated case on 4 | |the merits, and not for any purpose of delay. 5 Additionally, counsel for the Parties in this matter are litigating several other 6 | junrelated matters (including against each other) which have competing demands. While 7 | |competing demands of litigation are merely one of many reasons for the instant request, it 8 | |should be noted that the other litigation between the same counsel involving similar issues 9 | |can only benefit from the completion of discovery in this matter so that in other litigation, 10 | |similar requests can be expedited and can further the resolution of those matters and the 11 | interests of justice. Finally, counsel for the Parties are in the preliminary stages of settlement 12 | |discussions regarding this and other matters being litigated stemming from the Black Lives 13 | |Matter Protests. Thus, the standards to extend all requested deadlines is satisfied here. 14 Based on the foregoing stipulation and proposed deadlines plan, the Parties thus 15 | |respectfully request an extension of time to extend the discovery in this matter to enable to 16 | |them to conduct necessary discovery in this matter. 19 The Parties propose to add ninety (90) days to all current deadlines: 20 Add Parties
: 34 Disclosures
4 (If dispositive motions are filed, the
28 | |! Ninety (90) days after May 8, 2023, is Sunday, August 6, 2023.
1 deadline for shall be suspended until thirty (30) days after the decision of the 9 dispositive motions or further order of the Court.) 3 4 >| 6) 8 9 | [DATED this 28" day of March, 2023. DATED this 28" day of March, 2023. 10) |MCLETCHIE LAW MARQUIS AURBACH 11 /s/ Margaret A. McLetchie /s/ Jackie V. Nichols 12 | |Margaret A. McLetchie, Esq. (10931) Jackie V. Nichols (14246) Pieter M. O’Leary, Esq. (15297) 10001 Park Run Drive 13 | |Leo S. Wolpert, Esq. (12658) Las Vegas, NV 89145 14 | {602 South Tenth St. E-mail: jnichols@maclaw.com Las Vegas, NV 89101 Attorney for Defendants 15 | | Attorneys for Plaintiff 16 M7 ORDER 18 IT IS ORDERED that ECF No. 26 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is granted in all respects except that the deadline for initial expert disclosures is not extended at 19 this time, as the parties did not show excusable neglect for filing this motion after the deadline ran. See LR IA 6-1(a). The parties may seek to extend this deadline again if 20 they can show excusable neglect. DATED: 6:00 pm, March 29, 2023 22 rn la wey 2 3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28