Looper v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department

CourtDistrict Court, D. Nevada
DecidedJanuary 10, 2025
Docket2:23-cv-01436
StatusUnknown

This text of Looper v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (Looper v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department) 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
Looper v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, (D. Nev. 2025).

Opinion

1 || PETER S. CHRISTIANSEN, ESQ. [SBN 5254] pete @christiansenlaw.com 2 ||R. TODD TERRY, ESQ. [SBN 6519] 3 tterry @christiansenlaw.com KEELY P. CHIPPOLETTI, ESQ. [SBN 13931] 4 || keely @christiansenlaw.com CHRISTIANSEN TRIAL LAWYERS 5 || 710 South 7" Street, Suite B 6 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Telephone: (702) 240-7979 7 || Facsimile: (866) 412-6992 8 || PETER GOLDSTEIN, ESQ. [SBN 6992] 9 Peter@ petergoldsteinlaw.com PETER GOLDSTEIN LAW CORP 10 || 10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150 | Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 11 || Telephone: (702) 474-6400 2 Facsimile: (888) 400-8799

= 13 || Attorneys for Plaintiffs 14 DISTRICT COURT

15 CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

| 16 JACEY LOOPER, individually, CASENO.: = 2:23-cv-01436-JAD-EJY 17 Plaintiff, vs 19 LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE SECOND STIPULATION AND 20 DEPARTMENT; GLENN OBSENARES; ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR BRAYDEN MCMAHILL DOES 1 -10, PLAINTIFF TO FILE A 71 inclusive, RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR PARTIAL 22 Defendants. SUMMARY DEFENDANT 23 24 Plaintiff, JACEY LOOPER, by and through her attorneys of record, PETER □□ 25 || CHRISTIANSEN, ESQ., R. TODD TERRY, ESQ., and KEELY P. CHIPPOLETTI, ESQ. o 26 || CHRISTIANSEN TRIAL LAWYERS, and Defendants LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAI 27 || POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFC. OBSENARES and OFC. MCMAHILL, by and through thei 28 || attorneys, CRAIG R. ANDERSON, ESQ. of MARQUIS AURBACH, hereby file Stipulation an

Page 1 of 2

1 || Order to extend the deadline from January 14, 2025, for Plaintiff to respond to Defendants’ Partiz 2 || Motion for Summary Judgment to January 28, 2025. The basis for the extension relates to th 3 || post-holiday deadlines, as well as completing the research on areas of law with □□□□□□□□□□□ 4 || authority and is not made for an improper purpose or with any intent to delay disposition of th 5 |] instant matter. 7 DATED: January 10, 2025 DATED: January 10, 2025 g || CHRISTIANSEN TRIAL LAWYERS MARQUIS AURBACH 10 By_/s/Peter Christiansen By_/s/Craig Anderson | PETER S. CHRISTIANSEN, ESQ. CRAIG R. ANDERSON, ESQ. 11 || Nevada Bar No. 5254 Nevada Bar No. 6882 R. TODD TERRY, ESQ. MARQUIS AURBACH >. 12 |! Nevada Bar No. 6519 Nevada Bar No. 15859 = 13 || KEELY P. CHIPPOLETTI, ESQ. 10001 Park Run Drive < Nevada Bar No. 13931 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 14 || 710 South 7 Street Attorneys for Defendant LVMPD, Ofc. < Las Vegas, NV 89101 Obsenares and Ofc. McMahill 15 Attorneys for Plaintiff | 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. i> 18 Dated this 10th day of January, 2025. / 19

3 UNITED STATES DIS T JUDGE

22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Page 2 of 2

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Looper v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/looper-v-las-vegas-metropolitan-police-department-nvd-2025.