Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v. Adelson
Opinion
1 J.RANDALL JONES, ESQ., SBN 1927 r.jones@kempjones.com 2 MICHAEL J. GAYAN, ESQ., SBN 11135 m.gayan@kempjones.com 3 MONA KAVEH, ESQ., SBN 11825 m.kaveh@kempjones.com 4 KEMP JONES, LLP 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor 5 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 Telephone: +1 702 385 6000 6 DAVID R. SINGER, ESQ. (pro hac vice) 7 dsinger@jenner.com AMY M. GALLEGOS, ESQ. (pro hac vice) 8 agallegos@jenner.com JENNER & BLOCK LLP 9 515 South Flower Street, Suite 3300 Los Angeles, California 90071 10 Telephone: +1 213 239 5100 Facsimile: +1 213 239 5199 11 RICHARD L. STONE, ESQ. (pro hac vice) 12 rstone@fastmail.com 850 Devon Avenue 13 Los Angeles, California 90024 Telephone: +1 310 993 2068 14 Attorneys for Defendants/Counterclaimant 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 18 LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada Case No. 2:19-cv-01667-GMN-VCF 19 corporation, JOINT STIPULATION TO SET 20 Plaintiff, DEPOSITION PROTOCOLS 21 v. 22 SHELDON ADELSON, an individual and as the alter ego of News+Media Capital Group 23 LLC and as the alter ego of Las Vegas Review Journal, Inc.; PATRICK DUMONT, an 24 individual; NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability 25 company; LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES, I-X, 26 inclusive, 27 Defendants. 28 1 LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, 2 Counterclaimant, 3 v. 4 LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada 5 corporation; BRIAN GREENSPUN, an individual and as the alter ego of Las Vegas 6 Sun, Inc.; GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company, as 7 the alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc., 8 Counterclaim- Defendants. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., and Counterclaim- 2 Defendants BRIAN GREENSPUN and GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC (collectively the 3 “Sun”), by and through their counsel Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, Pisanelli Bice PLLC, 4 and the Alioto Law Firm, and Defendant/Counterclaimant LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 5 INC., and Defendants NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL GROUP LLC, SHELDON ADELSON, and 6 PATRICK DUMONT (collectively the “Review-Journal”), by and through their counsel of record, 7 Kemp Jones, LLP, Jenner & Block LLP, and Richard L. Stone, hereby stipulate and agree as 8 follows: 9 1. To ensure that depositions are conducted efficiently and to minimize disputes, all 10 objections during depositions in this matter must be stated concisely in a nonargumentative and 11 nonsuggestive manner consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(c)(2). 12 2. Objections to the form of a question shall be stated concisely, in words such as 13 “Objection, form,” or “objection to form.” Objections to form shall include questions that are 14 “leading or suggestive; ambiguous or uncertain; compound; assume facts not in evidence; call for 15 a narration; call for speculation or conjecture; or argumentative.” In re Stratosphere Corp. Sec. 16 Litig., 182 F.R.D. 614, 618 (D. Nev. 1998). Questions for which the parties believe there is a lack 17 foundation or improper foundation also fall within this category. The parties further agree that 18 even though relevance objections do not need to be preserved at deposition, objections to “form” 19 may be used to object on relevance grounds too. The failure to object on relevance grounds shall 20 not be deemed an implied or express waiver of any relevance objections. 21 3. Although not necessary to avoid waiving an objection to the relevance of a 22 question, counsel may state an objection to a question on the grounds that it seeks information that 23 is irrelevant due to a prior Court order regarding document discovery. Such objections shall be 24 stated as “objection, form” (as noted above) or, if counsel chooses, “objection, court order. ” 25 4. Consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(d)(3)(B)(i), objections may also 26 be made to an error or irregularity at the deposition on the rare occasion where it is necessary to 27 avoid waiver, including to the form of an answer, the oath or affirmation, a party’s conduct, or 28 1 5. Counsel may instruct a deponent not to answer only when necessary to preserve a 2 privilege, to enforce a limitation ordered by the court, or to present a motion under Federal Rule 3 of Civil Procedure 30(d)(3). The determination not to instruct a witness not to answer a question 4 that violates a court order shall not be deemed an implied or express waiver of any objection or 5 right. 6 6. The deposing counsel may request the basis for an objection to determine whether 7 to restate a question. All counsel shall refrain from arguing the merits of objections on the record, 8 to avoid impeding, delaying, or frustrating the fair examination of the deponent. 9 10 DATED this 14th day of March 2022. DATED this 14th day of March 2022. 11 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP KEMP JONES LLP 12 By: /s/ Kristen Martini By: /s/ Michael Gayan 13 E.Leif Reid, Bar No. 5750 J. Randall Jones, Esq., Bar No. 1927 Kristen L. Martini, Bar No. 11272 Michael J. Gayan, Esq., Bar No. 11135 14 Marla J. Hudgens, Bar No. 11098 Mona Kaveh, Esq., Bar No. 11825 15 Nicole Scott, Bar No. 13757 3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor One East Liberty Street, Suite 300 Las Vegas, Nevada 89169 16 Reno, Nevada 89501-2128 JENNER & BLOCK LLP 17 PISANELLI BICE PLLC David R. Singer, Esq., Pro Hac Vice 18 James J. Pisanelli, Bar No. 4027 Amy M. Gallegos, Esq., Pro Hac Vice Todd L. Bice, Bar No. 4534 515 South Flower Street, Suite 3300 19 Jordan T. Smith, Bar No. 12097 Los Angeles, California 90071 400 South 7th Street, Suite 300 20 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Richard L. Stone, Esq., Pro Hac Vice 850 Devon Avenue 21 ALIOTO LAW FIRM Los Angeles, California 90024 22 Joseph M. Alioto, Pro Hac Vice One Sansome Street, 35th Floor Attorneys for Defendants/ 23 San Francisco, California 94104 Counterclaimant 24 Attorneys for Plaintiff/ Counterclaim- Defendants 25 26 27 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA LAS VEGAS SUN, INC., a Nevada Case No. 2:19-CV-01667-GMN-VCF || corporation, Plaintiff, 4 V. SHELDON ADELSON, an individual and as PROPOSED 5|| the alter ego of News+Media Capital Group | | ORDER LLC and as the alter ego of Las Vegas Review 6|| Journal, Inc.; PATRICK DUMONT, an individual, NEWS+MEDIA CAPITAL 7|| GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 8 || INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES, I-X, inclusive, 9 Defendants. || LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, INC., a Delaware corporation, 1 Counterclaimant, 12 Vv. 13 LAS VEGAS SUN, INC. a Nevada corporation; BRIAN GREENSPUN, an individual and as the 14|| alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc.; GREENSPUN MEDIA GROUP, LLC, a Nevada limited 15|| liability company, as the alter ego of Las Vegas Sun, Inc. 16 . Counterclaim Defendants. 17 18 The Court, having considered the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Set Deposition Protocols, and || good cause appearing therefore, 20 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 21 1. The parties’ stipulated protocols for depositions in this matter shall apply to all 22 || depositions in this matter. 23 IT IS SO ORDERED: 25 \ 4,09 Dated this >t day of March 9922. f 26 SPECIAL MASTER PHILIP M. PRO 27 28
1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I hereby certify that on the 11th day of March, 2022, I served a true and correct copy of the 3 foregoing JOINT STIPULATION TO SET DEPOSITION PROTOCOLS via the United 4 States District Court’s CM/ECF electronic filing system to all parties on the e-service list. 5 E.Leif Reid, Bar No. 5750 Marla Hudgens, Bar No. 11098 6 Kristen L. Martini, Bar No. 11272 7 Nicole Scott, Bar No. 13757 LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP 8 One East Liberty Street, Suite 300 Reno, Nevada 89501 9 10 Joseph M.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v. Adelson (Las Vegas Sun, Inc. v. Adelson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.