McIntyre v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Department

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: May 7, 2025
• Docket: 2:24-cv-01953
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 LYSSA S. ANDERSON Nevada Bar No. 5781 2 KRISTOPHER J. KALKOWSKI Nevada Bar No. 14892 3 TRAVIS C. STUDDARD Nevada Bar No. 16454 4 KAEMPFER CROWELL 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 650 5 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702) 792-7000 6 Fax: (702) 796-7181 landerson@kcnvlaw.com 7 kkalkowski@kcnvlaw.com tstuddard@kcnvlaw.com 8 Attorneys for Defendant 9 Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 12 REGINA MCINTYRE, individually, and Case No.: 2:24:cv-01953-APG-EJY REGINA MCINTYRE, acting on behalf of the 13 Estate of James Chatien, STIPULATION TO EXTEND 14 Plaintiffs, DISCOVERY vs. (First Request) 15 LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 16 DEPARTMENT, a political subdivision of the State of Nevada; STATE OF NEVADA; 17 CLARK COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER; 18 CITY OF LAS VEGAS; and DOES 1 through 10, Corporate DOES 1 through 10, 19 Defendants. 20 21 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED between the parties that the discovery 22 cut-off date of July 28, 2025, be continued for a period of ninety days up to and including 23 Monday, October 27, 2025, for the purpose of allowing the parties to propound and respond to 24 written discovery; to allow experts time to review voluminous materials and prepare their expert 1 reports; to serve third-party subpoenas; and to take the depositions of Plaintiff and Rule 30(b)(6) 2 witnesses. 3 I. DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE 4 LVMPD provided its Initial Rule 26 Disclosures to Plaintiff which included nearly three-

5 thousand (3000) pages. Plaintiff has not yet provided her Rule 26 Disclosures. 6 II. DISCOVERY YET TO BE COMPLETED 7 LVMPD is currently researching and reviewing additional materials and will make 8 supplemental Rule 26 Disclosures and propound written discovery (Interrogatories, Requests for 9 Admissions and Requests for Production of Documents) on Plaintiff. Plaintiff will make her 10 Initial Rule 26 Disclosures and likewise, serve written discovery on LVMPD. The parties will 11 respond to written discovery. Additional information and documents will be provided to experts 12 to review. Experts will finish preparing draft reports and timely expert disclosures will be made. 13 The parties will coordinate and conduct the deposition of Plaintiff and Rule 30(b)(6) witnesses. 14 Any necessary third-party subpoenas or additional written discovery will be served.

15 III. REASONS WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED 16 The Parties submit this Stipulation to Extend Discovery (first request) is being made in 17 advance of the current discovery deadlines. Accordingly, a standard of “good cause” governs. D. 18 Nev. Local Rule 26-3. Good cause “primarily considers the diligence” of the parties seeking the 19 extension. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992) (explaining 20 that “[t]he district court may modify the pretrial schedule if it cannot reasonably be met despite 21 the diligence of the party seeking the extension.”) (internal quotations omitted). “Motions for 22 extension must include a statement specifying the discovery completed, a description of 23 discovery remaining, the reasons why the deadline was not satisfied, and a proposed schedule for 24 1 completing remaining discovery.” Hampton v. Nevada, No. 2:20-cv-00578-APG-DJA, 2021 WL 2 3573640, at *2 (D. Nev. July 29, 2021). 3 The claims in this matter surround the death of a former CCDC inmate by another CCDC 4 inmate. The information related to the claims is highly sensitive given it involves a death and a

5 charge for Open Murder. Moreover, the information relates to CCDC operations, the 6 institutional and mental health history of both inmates and the numerous investigations of the 7 death by LVMPD. It has taken considerable time to review the mass amount of materials related 8 the claims; and in fact, materials continue to be reviewed and will continue to be disclosed. In 9 addition, experts will need more time to review the materials and formulate their reports. 10 Although the parties have been diligent in conducting discovery, more time is needed 11 based upon the claims in this matter and the information surrounding the claims. The parties 12 submit that these reasons satisfy the applicable good cause standard imposed by Local Rule 26-3 13 for an extension of the current discovery deadlines. 14 IV. PROPOSED EXTENDED DEADLINES

15 The parties respectfully request this Court enter an order as follows: 16 Deadline Current Date Proposed New Date 17 Discovery Cut Off July 28, 2025 October 27, 2025 18 Disclosure of Experts May 29, 2025 August 28, 2025 19 Disclosure of Rebuttal Experts June 30, 2025 September 29, 2025 20 Dispositive Motion Deadline: August 27, 2025 November 26, 2025 21 Pre-Trial Order September 26, 2025 December 26, 2025 22 (A) Motions in Limine/Daubert Motions. 23 Under LR 16-3(b), any motions in limine, including Daubert motions, shall be filed and 24 1 served 30 days prior to the commencement of Trial. Oppositions shall be filed and served 14 2 days thereafter. Reply briefs will be allowed only with leave of the Court. 3 (B) Pretrial Order. 4 Pursuant to LR 26(1)(e)(5), the Joint Pretrial Order shall be filed with this Court no later

5 than thirty days after the date set for filing dispositive motions, unless dispositive motions are 6 filed, in which case the date for filing the Joint Pretrial Order shall be suspended until 30 days 7 after the decision on the dispositive motions or further order of this Court. The disclosures 8 required by FRCP 26(a)(3) and any objections shall be included in the final pretrial order. 9 (C) Extensions or Modification of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. 10 In accordance with LR 26-3, applications to extend any date set by the discovery plan, 11 scheduling order, or other order must, in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR 6-1, be 12 supported by a showing of good cause for the extension. All motions or stipulations to extend a 13 deadline set forth in a discovery plan shall be received by the Court not later than 21 days before 14 the expiration of the subject deadline. A request made after the expiration of the subject deadline

15 shall not be granted unless the movant demonstrates that the failure to set was the result of 16 excusable neglect. Any motion or stipulation to extend a deadline or to reopen discovery shall 17 include: 18 (a) A statement specifying the discovery completed; 19 (b) A specific description of the discovery that remains to be completed; 20 (c) The reasons why the deadline was not satisfied or the remaining discovery was 21 not completed within the time limits set by the discovery plan; and 22 (d) A proposed scheduled for completing all discovery. 23 / / /

24 / / / 1 The parties submit that good cause exists for an extension of the discovery deadlines. 2 Discovery just recently commenced in this matter. The parties have acted in good faith and are 3 will continue to conduct discovery in an expeditious manner. Because of the nature of the case 4 and claims, it has taken considerable time and resources to gather and assemble materials and

5 information relevant to the claims and defenses in this matter. This brief delay will not impede 6 this matter and, in fact, will assist all parties to complete all necessary discovery. No Trial has 7 been set and dispositive motions have not been filed. 8 IT IS SO STIPULATED this 7th day of May, 2025. 9 KAEMPFER CROWELL 10 By: /s/ Lyssa S. Anderson By: /s/ Michael Mee LYSSA S. ANDERSON MICHAEL MEE 11 Nevada Bar No. 5781 Nevada Bar No. 13726 KRISTOPHER J. KALKOWSKI 400 S. 4th Street 12 Nevada Bar No. 14892 Las Vegas NV 89101 TRAVIS C. STUDDARD 13 Nevada Bar No. 16454 Attorney for Plaintiff 1980 Festival Plaza Drive Suite 650 14 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 15 Attorneys for Defendant Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 16 Department 17 ORDER 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 20 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 21 Dated: May 7, 2025 22 23 24