Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided July 1, 2021·No. 2:17-cv-02916·Unknown

Opinion

Nevada Bar No. 8796 1925 Village Center Circle, Suite 150 Las Vegas, NV 89134 Tel: (702) 362-8500 Fax: (702) 362-8505 Email: Melanie@MelanieHillLaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Pamela Dittmar UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ***** PAMELA DITTMAR, Case No. 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING NUNC PRO TUNC STIPULATION TO EXTEND v. PLAINTIFF’S DISPOSITIVE MOTION RESPONSE AND THE PARTIES’ CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, a municipal REPLY DEADLINES FOR ONE DAY corporation, (Seventh Request) Defendant. [ECF No. 103] NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Pamela Dittmar, by and through her attorneys, Melanie A. Hill and Melanie Hill Law PLLC, and Defendant, City of North Las Vegas, by and through its attorneys, R. Todd Creer, Kaitlin H. Paxton, and Kamer Zucker Abbott, who hereby stipulate that the deadline for Plaintiff to file her response to the currently pending dispositive motion be extended one (1) judicial day from the current deadline of June 28, 2021 up to an including June 29, 2021. This is the seventh request for an extension of the dispositive motion deadline. The first request was by stipulation to extend the dispositive motion deadline thirty (30) days from the extended discovery cutoff deadline to complete the remaining two depositions. The second request was by motion due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s ongoing illness with Covid-19 symptoms. The third request was by stipulation due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s immediate family member’s emergency hospitalization for nearly one week. The fourth request was by stipulation due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s significant injuries from two separate accidents. The fifth request was by stipulation due

to Plaintiff’s counsel’s significant injuries from two separate accidents to allow her to have additional diagnostic tests, pain management, and give her additional time from her original estimate on a requested extension to treat and heal. The sixth request was made by stipulation to allow Plaintiff’s counsel additional time to obtain assistance with the formatting and preparation of the response exhibits and citations to the same in the response because her paralegal had a medical procedure last Friday and could not assist counsel due to a medical procedure. This seventh request is made by Stipulation and the parties have agreed to extend Plaintiff’s counsel deadline to file her response, declarations, and exhibits (including audio clips counsel needs to imbed into the brief) in support of her response to motion for summary judgment an additional one (1) day due to an acute gastro illness that Plaintiff’s counsel is suffering from that she informed counsel for Defendant came on suddenly in the early morning around 5:00am and gave her severe nausea and diarrhea. Plaintiff’s counsel further informed counsel for Defendant that after counsel woke up and started working it appeared to have resolved, however it just came back with a vengeance around 4:30pm and Plaintiff’s counsel has severe nausea, dry heaving, and diarrhea. Plaintiff’s counsel further informed counsel for Defendant that the acute illness is slowing counsel down from final completion of the response and counsel needed to lie down and rest for a few hours further delaying her filing before the midnight deadline on June 28, 2021. Plaintiff’s counsel further informed counsel for Defendant that even through her illness counsel is finalizing the response, declarations, exhibits, and audio clips and will file the response as soon as she is able within the next day to avoid any prejudice to Defendant CNLV who filed its response today because the parties had agreed in past extensions to move both parties’ deadlines each time to avoid any prejudice to the Defendant. Given the dispositive nature of this motion, counsel requested, and the parties stipulated, to this additional one- day extension due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s acute illness so Ms. Dittmar is not prejudiced in her case due to counsel’s acute gastro illness. As soon as it became apparent to counsel for Plaintiff that additional time was necessary to finalize the response, declarations, and citations to the exhibits due to her acute illness, counsel sent an email to counsel for Defendant at approximately 7:00pm requesting a one (1) day extension to file after midnight. Counsel for Defendant graciously responded at approximately 10:00pm agreeing to

stipulate to the requested one day extension. In support of this Stipulation and Order, the parties state as follows: 1. The current deadline to file responses to the currently pending dispositive motions is June 28, 2021. When the parties first entered into a stipulation to extend the dispositive motion deadline, it was to extend the dispositive motion deadline to thirty (30) days from the extended discovery cutoff deadline to complete the remaining two depositions. When the parties next entered into a stipulation to extend the dispositive motion deadline, it was to extend the dispositive motion deadline thirty (30) days due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s ongoing illness with Covid-19 symptoms. The parties then entered into a stipulation for an additional seven (7) days due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s family member’s health emergency. The parties then stipulated to extend the dispositive motion deadline due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s significant injuries from two separate accidents to allow Plaintiff’s counsel to have additional diagnostic tests, pain management, and additional time from her original estimate on a requested extension to treat and heal. Last Friday, the parties again stipulated to an extension to allow Plaintiff’s counsel addition time to prepare seek assistance in preparing her exhibits that she needs to cite to in the response and declarations. Due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s continued pain from two separate accidents, she is also not able to sit and work for long periods of time and the exhibit formatting and preparation, in addition to the response preparation is very time consuming and her pain has increased due to time spent sitting and working and standing and working at her standing desk for lengthy periods of time. As a result of needing to take lengthy breaks to reduce the pain, counsel for Plaintiff sought additional time and assistance to complete the response and exhibits necessitating the prior stipulation to extend the response and reply deadlines one (1) judicial day. 2. Counsel for Plaintiff reached out to counsel for Defendant this evening to inform counsel that she needs one additional day to file her response, declarations, and exhibits (including audio clips counsel needs to imbed into the brief) in support of her response to motion for summary judgment due after the midnight deadline due to an acute gastro illness that Plaintiff’s counsel informed counsel for Defendant came on suddenly in the early morning around 5:00am and gave her severe nausea and diarrhea. Plaintiff’s counsel further informed counsel for Defendant that after

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

Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas, (D. Nev. 2021).

Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas (Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Creedon v. Taubman
8 F.R.D. 268 (N.D. Ohio, 1947)
Canup v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co.
31 F.R.D. 282 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1962)