Howard v. United States of America ex rel United States Postal Service

Opinion

SUInGitAedL SCtaHteAs TATttAoHrn e y District of Nevada Nevada Bar Number 8264 VIRGINIA T. TOMOVA Assistant United States Attorney Nevada Bar No. 12504 501 Las Vegas Blvd. So., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 388-6336 virginia.tomova@usdoj.gov Attorneys for the United States

DISTRICT OF NEVADA Joel Kane Howard, individually, Case No. 2:21-cv-00643-APG-EJY Plaintiff, Stipulation and Order to Bifurcate Trial v. United States of America, Defendant. Plaintiff Joel Kane Howard and Defendant United States of America, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate to bifurcate the trial in this case, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(b), into two phases – liability and damages. The trial is currently set for September 22, 2025, at 9:00 am. ECF No. 71. This stipulation is based upon the following: 1. Brief Factual Summary of Case and Underlying Incident: This case involves a negligence action against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq., arising out of an April 23, 2018, incident between a bicycle operated by plaintiff and a United States Postal Service vehicle. The incident occurred on Westcliff Drive in Las Vegas, to the west of the Bank of America building. The parties are disputing liability for this incident. Because liability is disputed, the parties stipulate in the interest of judicial economy, parties’ convenience, and undue prejudice to bifurcate this trial into two phases – a liability phase and a damages phase. 2. Authority to Bifurcate: Bifurcation is particularly appropriate when resolution of a single claim or issue could be dispositive of the entire case. Alele v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co., 420 F. Supp. 3d 1124, 1130 (D. Nev. 2019). Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b) permits bifurcation of trial “for convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b). Courts accordingly may order a separate trial of one or more issues, claims, crossclaims, counterclaims, or third-party claims. Id. For example, “[i]t is clear that Rule 42(b) gives courts the authority to separate trials into liability and damage phases.” Est. of Diaz v. City of Anaheim, 840 F.3d 592, 601 (9th Cir. 2016) (quoting De Anda v. City of Long Beach, 7 F.3d 1418, 1421 (9th Cir. 1993)). The decision to bifurcate is within the court’s discretion. Alele, at 1130; see also Hirst v. Gertzen, 676 F.2d 1252, 1261 (9th Cir. 1982). 3. Justification to Bifurcate: A finding of liability against plaintiff could resolve the entire case without any need to address damages. Cook v. United Serv. Auto. Ass’n., 169 F.R.D. 359, 361 (D. Nev. 1996) (explaining that bifurcation is particularly appropriate “when resolution of a single claim or issue could be dispositive of the entire case” (citing 9 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil 2d, § 2388, p. 476 (1994))). Bifurcation could therefore save the parties significant funds in calling experts on damages and medical treatment, while creating the potential for resolution through a shorter trial process. As most of the evidence on damages do not appear essential to establishing what happened before and during the incident, it is unlikely that there will be duplicative presentation of evidence if bifurcation occurred. Further, evidence on the extent of plaintiff’s claimed injuries is not essential to proving liability with his negligence claim. Finally, bifurcation avoids potentially unnecessary costs while effectively and efficiently resolving factual and legal issues. 4. Terms of Bifurcation: a. The trial is currently set for September 22, 2025, at 09:00 am. ECF No. 71. b. The parties request that trial be bifurcated into two phases — liability and damages. c. The parties anticipate that liability determination will be completed in two days. Respectfully submitted this 23rd day of June 2025. SIGAL CHATTAH United States Attorney DIMOPOULOS INJURY LAW /s/ Virginia T. Tomova /s/ Paul A. Shpirt g || VIRGINIA T. TOMOVA PAUL A. SHPIRT Assistant United States Attorney Nevada Bar No. 10441 Nevada Bar No. 12504 6671 South Las Vegas Blvd Suite 275 501 Las Vegas Blvd. So., Suite 1100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 1] ILas Vegas, Nevada 89101 Plainti as Vegas, INevada Attorney for Plaintiff Attorneys for the United States CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE DATED: June 24, 2025