1 | AUSTIN R. WOOD, ESQ. Nevada Bar No.: 16026 2 RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM 3 801 South Fourth Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 4 | Telephone: (702) 444-4444 5 Facsimile: (702) 444-4455 Email: Austin@richardharrislaw.com 6 |Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 KATHLEEN MARTIN, individually; Case No.: 2:24-cv-00973-JAD-NJK 10 Plaintiff, JOINT PRE-TRIAL ORDER vs. 12 . □ ALBERTSON’S LLC, a Foreign Limited- 13. | Liability Company; DOES I through XX; and a ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I through XX, = 14 inclusive, S15 a Defendants. ~ 16 □□ After pretrial proceedings in this case, 18 = IT IS ORDERED: 19 I. INTRODUCTION 20 This is a slip and fall case that occurred on or about December 26, 2022, at an Albertsons 21 located at 2910 Bicentennial Parkway, Henderson, Nevada 89044. 22 33 Plaintiff alleged Defendant as the owners, maintainers, operators, and/or controllers of the
34 property owed Plaintiff a duty of care to provide a safe environment for Plaintiff, a duty of care to adequately maintain and inspect the property, and a duty of care to warn Plaintiff of any non-obvious 25 and dangerous conditions. Plaintiff alleges Defendant breached that duty because Defendant knew, 26 reasonably should have known, and/or caused a dangerous condition to exist at the Property and 27 38 failed to warn or otherwise make safe the dangerous condition. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges that as a
Page 1 of 13
1 | direct and proximate result of these failures, Plaintiff slipped and fell and sustained injuries which 2 |required medical treatment and caused her significant pain and suffering. 3 Defendant denies the claims of (1) negligence/premise liability and demands strict proof of 4 |the damages alleged by Plaintiff, if any. Defendant further asserts that Plaintiff was guilty of 5 negligence on her own part which caused or contributed to any injuries suffered by her, and that the 6 |negligence of Plaintiff exceeds that of Defendant, if any, and that Plaintiff is thereby barred from 7 any recovery. 8 Defendant has offered additional affirmative defenses as part of its pleadings in this action, 9 |and Defendant reserves the right to rely on the pleadings on file in this action to articulate its 10 | contentions in this case. 11 Il. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 12 This action was originated by the filing of a Complaint in the District Court, Clark County, | Nevada on April 8, 2024. Defendant Answered on April 29, 2024, and removed the case from State 14 | Court to Federal Court on May 24, 2024, citing diversity between the parties and that this Court has 15 jurisdiction of the matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 28 U.S.C § 1446(d). 16 | TW. THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES AND REQUIRE 17 NO PROOF 18 1. Venue is proper. 19 2. This lawsuit arises out of an incident that occurred on December 26, 2024. 20 IV. THE FOLLOWING FACTS, ALTHOUGH NOT ADMITTED, WILL NOT BE 21 CONTESTED AT TRIAL BY EVIDENCE OF THE CONTRARY 22 1. None. 23 V. THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF FACT TO BE TRIED AND DETERMINED AT 24 TRIAL 25 1. Whether Defendant owed a duty of care to Plaintiff and, if so, what duty of care. 26 2. Whether Defendant breached a duty of care owed to Plaintiff. 27 3. Whether such breach was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any, what percentage. 28
Page 2 of 13
1 4. Whether Plaintiff exercised ordinary care, caution or prudence for the protection of herself 2 and, as such, whether Plaintiff was comparatively negligent. 3 5. Whether Plaintiff's negligence, if any, was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any, 4 what percentage. 5 6. Whether Plaintiff expressly assumed whatever risk or hazard existed at the time of the 6 incident. 7 7. Whether the risk or hazard were open, obvious, and known to Plaintiff. 8 8. Whether the damages sustained by Plaintiff were caused by the acts of third persons who 9 were not agents, servants, or employees of Defendant and who were not acting on behalf of 10 Defendant in any manner or form. 1 9. Whether Plaintiff suffered injuries as alleged, and whether those injuries were proximately 12 caused by the incident. 13 10. Whether Plaintiff failed to mitigate he complained of injuries and resulting damages. z 14 11. The nature, extent, and value of Plaintiffs incident related damages. 15 VI. THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF LAW TO BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL 16 1. Whether Plaintiff's Complaint is bared by an applicable statute of limitations. 17 2. Whether Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief 18 can be granted. 19 3. The issues of law raised in the parties’ anticipated Motions in Limine. 20 4. The issues of law raised by the parties at trial. 21 Vil. EXHIBITS 22 1. The following exhibits are stipulated into evidence in this case and may be so marked by 23 the clerk: 24 None. 25 2. The following exhibits though not agreed as admissible evidence in this case, are subject to 26 use by the parties. The parties will work to refine the list of exhibits as motions and 27 evidentiary decisions are decided by the Court and amongst the parties: 28
Page 3 of 13
1 Plaintiff's Proposed Exhibits:
cee sedate 4 Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB000009-
6 Photographs of Plaintiff at the scene of the incident == [__Reeeare ITT feet Reerarmmarey © 5 ora ly alr TERT | [sein Witte Senereeremeas 5 13 Desert Radiology billing statement (DR 0001 —- DR
= SimonMed Imaging medical records and billing
Advanced Orthopedic and Sports Medicine medical pA 18 11. records and billing statement (AOSM 0001 - AOSM 19 0025) 20 Valley Hospital Medical Center medical records and 22 US Anesthesia Partners of Nevada billing statement Select Physical Therapy medical records and billing
26 27 28
Page 4 of 13
1 Collective Union Health Windmill Lane a/k/a 2 |) 15. Everside Health medical records (CUH 0001 — CUH 3 0179) 4 CC Cleaning Policies and Procedures (ALB000774- =< [wero "|_| TOSET | [fener tan [eer 10 KellerMeyer Bergensons Services Agreement (Bates ———==—
Nn 13 Defendant’s Proposed Exhibits SS | [Ras Gm reel 16 5 Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB000009- Te 2 [SreploaRepor Batesstamped APBOOOOIS PO |_| Pretoears Bats stamped AL BONDE 20 Surveillance Video via OneDrive link: Martin v
22 Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to Albertsons dated January 9, 2023 (Bates stamped ALB000022-23) Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to *6 7. Sedgwick dated March 1, 2023 (Bates stamped a ALBO000024-25) 28
Page 5 of 13
1 Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris 2 Law Firm dated March 9, 2023 (Bates stamped 3 ALBO000026-27) 4 Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris 5 Law Firm dated May 16, 2023 (Bates stamped 6 ALB000028) 7 Chubb Group Excess Commercial General Liability 8 10. Policy Declarations (Bates stamped ALB000028-34)
10 Medical and billing records received from Simon 1 11. Med Imaging (7 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000035- |= 13 Images received from Simon Med Imaging (1 page) 14 |) 12, (CD available upon request) (Bates stamped = ALB000044) 16 Billing records received from US Anesthesia = 17 |) 43. Partners of Nevada (8 pages) (Bates stamped eis ALB00045-52) 19 Medical and billing records received from Select 20 |] 14. Physical Therapy (31 pages) (Bates stamped 21 ALBO000053-83) 22 Incident Detail Report (Bates stamped ALB000084- ee 24 Medical and billing records received from Advanced 25 1) 16. Orthopedic & Sports Medicine (28 pages) (Bates 26 stamped ALB000089-116) 27 28
Page 6 of 13
1 Medical and billing records received from Desert 2 |) 17.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1 | AUSTIN R. WOOD, ESQ. Nevada Bar No.: 16026 2 RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM 3 801 South Fourth Street Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 4 | Telephone: (702) 444-4444 5 Facsimile: (702) 444-4455 Email: Austin@richardharrislaw.com 6 |Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 KATHLEEN MARTIN, individually; Case No.: 2:24-cv-00973-JAD-NJK 10 Plaintiff, JOINT PRE-TRIAL ORDER vs. 12 . □ ALBERTSON’S LLC, a Foreign Limited- 13. | Liability Company; DOES I through XX; and a ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES I through XX, = 14 inclusive, S15 a Defendants. ~ 16 □□ After pretrial proceedings in this case, 18 = IT IS ORDERED: 19 I. INTRODUCTION 20 This is a slip and fall case that occurred on or about December 26, 2022, at an Albertsons 21 located at 2910 Bicentennial Parkway, Henderson, Nevada 89044. 22 33 Plaintiff alleged Defendant as the owners, maintainers, operators, and/or controllers of the
34 property owed Plaintiff a duty of care to provide a safe environment for Plaintiff, a duty of care to adequately maintain and inspect the property, and a duty of care to warn Plaintiff of any non-obvious 25 and dangerous conditions. Plaintiff alleges Defendant breached that duty because Defendant knew, 26 reasonably should have known, and/or caused a dangerous condition to exist at the Property and 27 38 failed to warn or otherwise make safe the dangerous condition. Lastly, Plaintiff alleges that as a
Page 1 of 13
1 | direct and proximate result of these failures, Plaintiff slipped and fell and sustained injuries which 2 |required medical treatment and caused her significant pain and suffering. 3 Defendant denies the claims of (1) negligence/premise liability and demands strict proof of 4 |the damages alleged by Plaintiff, if any. Defendant further asserts that Plaintiff was guilty of 5 negligence on her own part which caused or contributed to any injuries suffered by her, and that the 6 |negligence of Plaintiff exceeds that of Defendant, if any, and that Plaintiff is thereby barred from 7 any recovery. 8 Defendant has offered additional affirmative defenses as part of its pleadings in this action, 9 |and Defendant reserves the right to rely on the pleadings on file in this action to articulate its 10 | contentions in this case. 11 Il. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 12 This action was originated by the filing of a Complaint in the District Court, Clark County, | Nevada on April 8, 2024. Defendant Answered on April 29, 2024, and removed the case from State 14 | Court to Federal Court on May 24, 2024, citing diversity between the parties and that this Court has 15 jurisdiction of the matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and 28 U.S.C § 1446(d). 16 | TW. THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES AND REQUIRE 17 NO PROOF 18 1. Venue is proper. 19 2. This lawsuit arises out of an incident that occurred on December 26, 2024. 20 IV. THE FOLLOWING FACTS, ALTHOUGH NOT ADMITTED, WILL NOT BE 21 CONTESTED AT TRIAL BY EVIDENCE OF THE CONTRARY 22 1. None. 23 V. THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF FACT TO BE TRIED AND DETERMINED AT 24 TRIAL 25 1. Whether Defendant owed a duty of care to Plaintiff and, if so, what duty of care. 26 2. Whether Defendant breached a duty of care owed to Plaintiff. 27 3. Whether such breach was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any, what percentage. 28
Page 2 of 13
1 4. Whether Plaintiff exercised ordinary care, caution or prudence for the protection of herself 2 and, as such, whether Plaintiff was comparatively negligent. 3 5. Whether Plaintiff's negligence, if any, was a proximate cause of the incident and, if any, 4 what percentage. 5 6. Whether Plaintiff expressly assumed whatever risk or hazard existed at the time of the 6 incident. 7 7. Whether the risk or hazard were open, obvious, and known to Plaintiff. 8 8. Whether the damages sustained by Plaintiff were caused by the acts of third persons who 9 were not agents, servants, or employees of Defendant and who were not acting on behalf of 10 Defendant in any manner or form. 1 9. Whether Plaintiff suffered injuries as alleged, and whether those injuries were proximately 12 caused by the incident. 13 10. Whether Plaintiff failed to mitigate he complained of injuries and resulting damages. z 14 11. The nature, extent, and value of Plaintiffs incident related damages. 15 VI. THE FOLLOWING ISSUES OF LAW TO BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL 16 1. Whether Plaintiff's Complaint is bared by an applicable statute of limitations. 17 2. Whether Plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief 18 can be granted. 19 3. The issues of law raised in the parties’ anticipated Motions in Limine. 20 4. The issues of law raised by the parties at trial. 21 Vil. EXHIBITS 22 1. The following exhibits are stipulated into evidence in this case and may be so marked by 23 the clerk: 24 None. 25 2. The following exhibits though not agreed as admissible evidence in this case, are subject to 26 use by the parties. The parties will work to refine the list of exhibits as motions and 27 evidentiary decisions are decided by the Court and amongst the parties: 28
Page 3 of 13
1 Plaintiff's Proposed Exhibits:
cee sedate 4 Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB000009-
6 Photographs of Plaintiff at the scene of the incident == [__Reeeare ITT feet Reerarmmarey © 5 ora ly alr TERT | [sein Witte Senereeremeas 5 13 Desert Radiology billing statement (DR 0001 —- DR
= SimonMed Imaging medical records and billing
Advanced Orthopedic and Sports Medicine medical pA 18 11. records and billing statement (AOSM 0001 - AOSM 19 0025) 20 Valley Hospital Medical Center medical records and 22 US Anesthesia Partners of Nevada billing statement Select Physical Therapy medical records and billing
26 27 28
Page 4 of 13
1 Collective Union Health Windmill Lane a/k/a 2 |) 15. Everside Health medical records (CUH 0001 — CUH 3 0179) 4 CC Cleaning Policies and Procedures (ALB000774- =< [wero "|_| TOSET | [fener tan [eer 10 KellerMeyer Bergensons Services Agreement (Bates ———==—
Nn 13 Defendant’s Proposed Exhibits SS | [Ras Gm reel 16 5 Defendant’s Answer (Bates stamped ALB000009- Te 2 [SreploaRepor Batesstamped APBOOOOIS PO |_| Pretoears Bats stamped AL BONDE 20 Surveillance Video via OneDrive link: Martin v
22 Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to Albertsons dated January 9, 2023 (Bates stamped ALB000022-23) Correspondence from Richard Harris Law Firm to *6 7. Sedgwick dated March 1, 2023 (Bates stamped a ALBO000024-25) 28
Page 5 of 13
1 Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris 2 Law Firm dated March 9, 2023 (Bates stamped 3 ALBO000026-27) 4 Correspondence from Sedgwick to Richard Harris 5 Law Firm dated May 16, 2023 (Bates stamped 6 ALB000028) 7 Chubb Group Excess Commercial General Liability 8 10. Policy Declarations (Bates stamped ALB000028-34)
10 Medical and billing records received from Simon 1 11. Med Imaging (7 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000035- |= 13 Images received from Simon Med Imaging (1 page) 14 |) 12, (CD available upon request) (Bates stamped = ALB000044) 16 Billing records received from US Anesthesia = 17 |) 43. Partners of Nevada (8 pages) (Bates stamped eis ALB00045-52) 19 Medical and billing records received from Select 20 |] 14. Physical Therapy (31 pages) (Bates stamped 21 ALBO000053-83) 22 Incident Detail Report (Bates stamped ALB000084- ee 24 Medical and billing records received from Advanced 25 1) 16. Orthopedic & Sports Medicine (28 pages) (Bates 26 stamped ALB000089-116) 27 28
Page 6 of 13
1 Medical and billing records received from Desert 2 |) 17. Radiology (27 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000117- 3 143) 4 Certificate of No Records Found received from 5S |} 18. Shadow Emergency Physicians (6 pages) (Bates 6 stamped ALB000144-149) 7 Medical and Images received from Desert Radiology 8 1} 19, (1 page) (Images available upon request) (Bates 9 stamped ALB000150) 10 Medical and billing records received from VHS - 11 || 20. Valley Hospital (312 pages) (Bates stamped 12 ALBO000151-462) 13 Medical and billing records received from Active 14 1) 21, Healthcare (306 pages) (Bates stamped ALB000463- = 15 768) [Wott meetarnOTIRTI = 17 33 CC Cleaning Policies and Procedures (Bates stamped
19 General Policies and Procedures (Bates stamped □□ 21 KellerMeyer Bergensons Services Agreement (Bates ———————=|_ 2 [enna atm@T | |_| Pree bee ea [TT [_ [sone amersmeetareoeE 26 a7 The parties reserve the right to use any discovery responses and/or deposition testimony 28 and/or deposition exhibits for impeachment and/or substantively as party admissions, as may be
Page 7 of 13
1 relevant at trial. The parties reserve the right to use demonstrative evidence. The parties also reserves 2 |the right to use any exhibit listed or introduced by the opposing party, or as previously produced by 3 |the parties. The parties also reserve the right to amend the proposed exhibits and objections at any 4 time prior to the start of trial in this matter. 5 The parties reserve any and all evidentiary objections for trial. The parties reserve the right 6 |to object to the admissibility of trial exhibits on the basis of foundation, authenticity, hearsay, and 7 |relevance. The parties further reserve the right to object to any exhibit being offered by each side 8 which has not been previously produced during the normal course of discovery proceedings, or 9 pursuant to stipulation and agreement of the parties. The parties also reserve any and all evidentiary 10 | objections for trial. 1 Electronic Evidence: The parties intend to offer and present evidence in electronic format 12 |to jurors for the purpose of jury deliberations pursuant to Local Rule 16-3(b)(9) and will contact the | Court Administrator for instructions how to prepare evidence in electronic format and for any other 14 | requirements set by the Court. 15 Depositions: The parties at this time do not intend to offer page and line designations for 16 □□□ deposition transcripts. In the event that the parties learn that a witness is unavailable to testify 17 | at trial, the respective party will notify all parties and the Court of page and line designations of the 18 | unavailable witness’s deposition transcript to offer at trial. Defendant reserves the right to use all 19 depositions which have been conducted in this action to refresh recollection and/or to impeach a 20 | witness, and otherwise use at trial in accordance with the applicable rules, 1.e., Fed. R. Civ. P. 32; 21 Fed. R. Evid. 801(d). 22 VII. FACT & PERCIPIENT WITNESSES 23 Plaintiff's Proposed Witnesses 24 1. Kathleen Martin 95 c/o Richard Harris Law Firm 801 South 4" Street %6 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Phone: (702) 444-4444 27 38 2. Scott Martin 2043 Colvin Run Drive
Page 8 of 13
1 Henderson, Nevada 89052 3. Jaime Franco, Employee of Albertson 3 c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM 139 East Warm Springs Road 4 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 5 Phone: (702) 380-0007 6 4. Kenny Benedict, 30(b)(6) Designee c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM 7 139 East Warm Springs Road g Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Phone: (702) 380-0007 9 5. Anebe Pretorius, 30(b)(6) Designee 10 c/o BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM 139 East Warm Springs Road Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 12 Phone: (702) 380-0007 Ls 13 6. X. Nick Liu, D.O. me i Advanced Orthopedic & Sports Medicine = 7195 Advanced Way S15 Las Vegas, Nevada 89113 A x Defendant’s Proposed Witnesses: 17 1. Plaintiff, KATHLEEN MARTIN, c/o Austin R. Wood, Esq. of Richard Harris Law
19 Firm, 801 South Fourth Street, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101. This witness is expected to testify 29 regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's Complaint. 21 2. Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s 30(b)(6) witness, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq., 22 Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm Springs 23 Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and 24 circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's Complaint. 26 3. Jaime Franco, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr., 27 |Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm 28
Page 9 of 13
1 | Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and 2 | circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's Complaint. 4. Kenny Benedict, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon,
5 Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm 6 Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness 1s expected to testify regarding the facts and 7 | circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's Complaint. 8 5. Alexander Serrano, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm
Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and 12 | circumstances surrounding Plaintiffs Complaint. 5 13 6. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Simon Med Imaging, 4 6900 E Camelback Rd, Ste. 700, Scottsdale, AZ 85251. This witness is expected to testify regarding = = the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, 17 | Prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. 18 7. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for US Anesthesia 19 | Partners of Nevada 7160 Rafael Rivera Way, Ste 210 Las Vegas, NV 89113. This witness is expected to testify regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerming the treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. 23 8. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Select Physical 24 | Therapy 680 American Ave, Floor King of Prussia, PA 19406. This witness is expected to testify 2 regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiffs alleged injuries. 28
Page 10 of 13
1 9. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Advanced Orthopedic 2 le Sports Medicine 7195 Advanced Way Las Vegas, NV 89113. This witness is expected to testify regarding the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the
5 treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiffs alleged injuries. 6 10. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Desert Radiology 2020 7 |Palomino Ln, Ste 100 Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding the 8 completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries. 1 11. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Shadow Emergency 12 Physicians 620 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding N 5 | the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, 4 prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff's alleged injuries. = = 12. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for VHS-Valley Hospital 17 |620 Shadow Lane Las Vegas, NV 89106. This witness is expected to testify regarding the 18 completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, prognostics 19 and diagnostics of Plaintiffs alleged injuries. 13. Custodian of Records and/or Person Most Knowledgeable for Active Healthcare 911 North Buffalo Drive, Ste 113 Las Vegas, NV 89128. This witness is expected to testify regarding 23 |the completeness and authenticity of any and all records obtained concerning the treatment, 24 | prognostics and diagnostics of Plaintiff’s alleged injuries. 25 14. Anebe Pretorius, Defendant, ALBERTSON’S LLC’s employee, c/o Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq., Ryan Venci, Esq., and Kristen Molloy, Esq. of Brandon | Smerber Law Firm, 139 E. Warm
Page 11 of 13
1 | Springs Road, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119. This witness is expected to testify regarding the facts and 2 | circumstances surrounding Plaintiff's Complaint. 3 The parties agree that the witness and exhibit list may be amended as required before trial. 4 The parties reserve the right to use any witnesses listed by any other party to this litigation. The 5 parties further reserve the right to name and list any witnesses deemed necessary for rebuttal 6 and/or impeachment purposes. 7 IX. TRIAL DATE 8 Counsel have met and conferred and submit a list of three (3) agreed-upon start dates for 9 trial: 10 February 9, 2026 1] February 16, 2026 12 February 23, 2026 13 5 It is expressly understood by the undersigned that the Court will set a trial of this matter on me 14 = Z one of the agreed-upon dates if possible; if not, the trial will be set at the convenience of the Court’s 15 calendar. Be =< X. ESTIMATED LENGTH OF TRIAL 17 5 It is estimated that the trial will take a total of 7-10 days. 18 DATED on this 5" day of March, 2025. DATED on this 5" day of March, 2025. 19 20 | RICHARD HARRIS LAW FIRM BRANDON | SMERBER LAW FIRM 21 _/s/ Austin Wood _/s/_Kristen Molloy 92 | Austin R. Wood, Esq. Lew Brandon, Jr., Esq. Nevada Bar No.: 16026 Nevada Bar No.: 5880 23 | 801 South Fourth Street Ryan Venci, Esq. Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 Nevada Bar No. 7547 Attorneys for Plaintiff Kristen Molloy, Esq. 25 Nevada Bar No. 14927 139 E. Warm Springs Road 26 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Attorney for Defendant 28
Page 12 of 13
1 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 2 1. Trial date. This case is set down for a JURY trial on the Tuesday, February 10, 2026, 3 9:00 a.m. two-week trial stack. 4 2. Calendar call. The parties must appear for Calendar Call on January 26, 2026, at 1:30 5 p.m.
6 3. Length of trial. Though the parties have indicated that they anticipate this will be a 7 to 7 10- day trial, upon review, the court concludes that this case should take no more than 8 4 full days to try, so the parties should plan and prepare their witness schedules to finish 9 this trial within 4 days, and during voir dire, the court will seek a jury that is time- 10 qualified for 4 days. 11 4. Trial documents must be filed by Calendar Call. No later than noon on the day before 12 the scheduled Calendar Call, each party must file with the Court: (a) the parties’ trial 13 briefs; (b) a list of each party’s witnesses; (c) a stipulated exhibit list, and separate exhibit 14 lists for exhibits that are not stipulated (the parties must meaningfully meet and confer to
15 prepare a stipulated exhibit list before this deadline); (d) jointly proposed jury 16 instructions and separate jury instructions for proposed instructions that are not stipulated 17 to; (e) each party’s proposed voir dire questions. 18 5. Deposition designations due 30 days before trial. Any party who anticipates 19 presenting deposition testimony in lieu of live testimony must file (a) page-and-line 20 designations along with (b) a mini version of each relevant deposition transcript at least 21 30 days before trial; failure to timely file deposition designations will result in the 22 preclusion of the testimony at trial. Objections to such designations must be filed no 23 later than five calendar days after the designations are filed; failure to file timely 24 objections to deposition designations renders those objections waived. Responses to any 1 such objections are due three calendar days after the objections are filed. Absent 2 extraordinary circumstances, no extension of these deadlines will be granted with or 3 without a stipulation because rulings on such designations are time-consuming and the 4 court requires sufficient time in advance of trial to make them. 5 6. Motions in limine.
6 a. MIL deadlines. Motions in limine (MILs) are due December 12, 2025, and 7 responses are due 14 days later. These court-ordered deadlines override any deadline 8 contained in a federal or local rule and will not be extended absent extraordinary 9 circumstances. MIL replies will be allowed only with leave of court, and each side may 10 file only a single request for leave, see L.R. 16-3(a). 11 b. Additional MIL requirements. The process for preparing and filing 12 motions in limine will be governed by the following additional rules and considerations: 13 i. Meaningful meet-and-confer required. As Local Rule 16-3 requires, 14 before any motion in limine is filed, the parties must meet and confer (by telephone or in
15 person not merely by email or some other form of writing) about the substance of each 16 contemplated in-limine issue and attempt to reach an agreement on the issue. Evidentiary 17 agreements reached during this process must be memorialized by a written stipulation. If 18 the parties do not reach an agreement on an issue and a motion in limine remains necessary, 19 the motion must be accompanied by a declaration certifying that counsel actually conferred 20 in good faith to resolve the issue before the motion was filed (or re-filed), see L.R. 16-3(a). 21 The failure to include the certificate of counsel will result in the automatic denial of the 22 motion without the opportunity to cure this deficiency. 23 24 1 il. Only evidentiary issues. Motions in limine must address only tru 2 evidentiary issues and not be belated motions for dispositive rulings disguised as a motio 3 in limine. 4 iil. Omnibus filing. Any party desiring to file motions in limine o 5 multiple issues or requesting multiple rulings must include all in-limine issues in 6 SINGLE, omnibus motion that numbers each issue consecutively; no party may fil 7 multiple, separate motions. This format eliminates the need for redundant recitations o 8 facts and introductory statements of the law. If the size of the omnibus motion exceeds th 9 page limit in the local rule, see L-.R. 7-3(b), a separate motion to exceed the page limit 10 should be filed contemporaneously with the omnibus motion; the motion to exceed pag 11 limits must not be styled as an “emergency.” 12 iv. Vague requests prohibited. The parties are cautioned that vagu 13 requests based on speculative issues, like requests to generally preclude improper attorne 14 arguments, violations of the golden rule, or irrelevant evidence will be flatly denied. Th 15 court intends to follow the rules of evidence and procedure at trial and expects the partie 16 to do the same. Motions seeking little more than an order enforcing a rule waste the court’ 17 time and the parties’ resources. Counsel is strongly cautioned that abuse of the motion-in: 18 limine vehicle in this manner may result in sanctions against the attorneys. 19 99 || This order will govern the trial of this case and may not be amended except by order of the court. DATED: 3/6/2025
Jennifer Ay. Dose 23 United States District Judge 24