Motley v. State of Nevada

Opinion

3 * * *

4 COURTNEY MOTLEY, Case No. 2:21-cv-02075-GMN-BNW

5 Plaintiff, ORDER 6 v.

7 STATE OF NEVADA, et al.,

8 Defendants.

9 10 Before the Court are three motions from Plaintiff that request various forms of relief. ECF 11 Nos. 91, 93, and 94. The Court addresses each request, in turn, below: 12 Bench Trial. Plaintiff requests that the Court set the case for a bench trial. ECF No. 91. In 13 response to Plaintiff’s recent request for a bench trial, the Court informed Plaintiff that he could 14 not unilaterally change the proceeding from a jury trial to a bench trial. ECF No. 87. The Court 15 directed Defendants to indicate whether they consent to a bench trial. Id. To date, Defendants 16 have not responded. As the Court previously explained, Defendants must first consent to a bench 17 trial before Plaintiff’s request can be granted. 18 Trial Date. Plaintiff also requests that the Court set a trial within 45 days. ECF No. 91. 19 The Court previously indicated that it would set a new trial date once the Court receives a notice 20 of appearance from appointed pro bono counsel or a notice from the Pro Bono Program that it 21 was unable to find an attorney for Plaintiff. ECF No. 78. The Court later directed Plaintiff to 22 indicate whether he wishes to proceed pro se or remain referred to the Federal Pro Bono Program. 23 ECF No. 87. To date, Plaintiff has not informed the Court of his decision. The Court must receive 24 Plaintiff’s response before it can set a trial date. 25 Production of Video Footage. Plaintiff moves to compel Defendants to produce video 26 footage from September 24, 2021. ECF Nos. 91 and 94. However, Defendants indicated in their 27 response to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production that they do not have the video footage in their 1 which they do not have. U.S. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm’n v. KVP, LP, No. 2:23-cv-01308- 2 JCM-EJY, 2025 WL 1042726, at *3 (D. Nev. Mar. 5, 2025). As the Court previously instructed, 3 Plaintiff may a move for spoliation sanctions if he so chooses. ECF No. 90; see also FED. R. CIV. 4 P. 37(e). 5 Production of Regulations/Procedures. Plaintiff requests that the Court order production 6 of Defendants’ regulations and procedures regarding video extraction. ECF No. 91. But before 7 the Court can compel production, Plaintiff must have served Defendants with a request for 8 production under Rule 34. FED. R. CIV. P. 37(a)(3)(B)(iv). Plaintiff’s Requests for Production did 9 not include a request for Defendants’ regulations and procedures. See ECF No. 89-1. The Court 10 therefore cannot compel Defendants to produce such documents. 11 Subpoena Duces Tecum. Plaintiff asserts that Defendants must comply with the subpoena 12 duces tecum he issued on May 2, 2025. A subpoena duces tecum is issued by a party to a third 13 party/nonparty. See FED. R. CIV. P. 45. Defendants are not third parties and thus are subject to 14 party discovery under Rules 33, 34, and 36, not subpoenas under Rule 45. 15 Default. Plaintiff asks the Court to enter a default against Defendants as a sanction for 16 failing to produce video footage. But as discussed above, the Court has not compelled Defendants 17 to produce such footage. Defendants therefore have not, as Plaintiff contends, violated a court 18 order. See FED. R. CIV. P. 37(b)(2)(A). Thus, the Court cannot determine at this time whether 19 sanctions against Defendants should issue. If Plaintiff chooses to file a motion based on spoliation 20 of evidence, he must include the relevant points and authorities in support of such request. ECF 21 No. 90. 22 Leave to Amend. Lastly, Plaintiff seeks leave to amend his complaint to request additional 23 “garnishments,” or prayers for relief. ECF No. 93. However, as the Court previously explained, a 24 motion for leave to amend must include a complete copy of the proposed amended complaint 25 attached. ECF No. 88 at 3; LR 15-1. Because Plaintiff has failed to attach a proposed amended 26 complaint here, the Court denies this request. 27 1] 1 CONCLUSION 2 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment, 3 || Immediate Relief Request, and Bench Trial (ECF No. 91), Motion for Leave to Amend (ECF 4 || No. 93), and Moton to Compel (ECF No. 94) are DENIED. 5 6 DATED: May 8, 2025 7 Zi gow La We BRENDA WEKSLER 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28