Smith v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
Opinion
1 Peter Goldstein [SBN 6992] PETER GOLDSTEIN LAW CORP 2 peter@petergoldsteinlaw.com 10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150 3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 Telephone: (702) 474-6400 4 Facsimile: (888) 400-8799 5 Clyde M. Rastetter [PHV] Kopke Christiana & Rastetter LLP 6 clyde@kcrllp.com 199 Cook Street, Suite 308 7 Brooklyn, NY 11206 Telephone: (917) 451-9525 8 Facsimile: (347) 315-9815 9 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Mary Smith, Individually, and as Special Administrator 10 of the Estate of James Perea 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA (LAS VEGAS) 13 MARY SMITH, individually, and as Special Case No. 2:23-cv-00092-JAD-NJK 14 Administrator of the Estate of JAMES PEREA, 15 STIPULATION TO MODIFY THE Plaintiffs, DEADLINES TO RESPOND AND 16 REPLY TO LVMPD DEFENDANTS’ vs. MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 17 JUDGMENT LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 18 DEPARTMENT; WELLPATH, LLC; RN RACHEL 19 CLARK; RN TANJA WASIELEWSKI; RN (First Request) GENEVA BESSIE; LCSW SANDRA CELIS; 20 MA/LNA MELEKA ST. JOHN; RN STEPHANIE ESTALA; NP HUGH ANDREW ROSSET; NP [ECF Nos. 143, 144, 146] 21 SHELLEY AMEDURI; PA ANDREA BALOGH; RN AYNUR KABOTA; CORRECTIONS OFFICER 22 VANESSA MITCHELL; CORRECTIONS 23 OFFICER DON’TE MITCHELL; CORRECTIONS OFFICER JOSHUA WALDMAN; DOES 1-30, 24 Defendants. 25 26 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Local Rule IA 6-1, Plaintiff Mary 27 Smith, individually and as Special Administrator of the Estate of James Perea (“Plaintiff”), 1 together with Defendants Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Vanessa Mitchell, and 2 Don’te Mitchell (“LVMPD Defendants”), through their respective counsel, stipulate and request 3 that the Court extend the deadlines for Plaintiff’s responses to LVMPD Defendants’ Motions for 4 Summary Judgment (filed April 25, 2025) from May 16, 2025 to May 30, 2025, and for LVMPD 5 Defendants’ replies from May 30, 2025 to June 13, 2025. This is the parties’ first request to 6 modify either of these deadlines. 7 On April 25, 2025, LVMPD Defendants filed Renewed Motions for Summary Judgment. 8 (ECF Nos. 140, 143–44). Plaintiff’s deadline to respond to these motions is currently May 16, 9 2025. (ECF No. 140). The deadline for LVMPD Defendants to file replies in support of their 10 motions is presently May 30, 2025. (ECF No. 140). 11 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) and Local Rule IA 6-1 impose a good cause standard 12 regarding the extension of deadlines that have not yet expired, which is a “non-rigorous standard 13 that has been construed broadly across procedural and statutory contexts.” Ahanchian v. Xenon 14 Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1259 (9th Cir. 2010). 15 The parties stipulate and agree that good cause exists to extend the deadlines for 16 responding and replying to the present summary judgment motions due to counsel for Plaintiff’s 17 overlapping obligations in other active cases, including deadlines related to a settlement 18 conference co-counsel Clyde Rastetter participated in this week in Biddings v. City of New York, 19 No. 24-cv-01732 (AT) (SLC) (S.D.N.Y.), and co-counsel Peter Goldstein’s recently being retained 20 in a police shooting death case with a statute of limitations date of May 16, 2025, which has 21 required concurrent proceedings to secure appointment of a special administrator in probate court. 22 Finally, the voluminous nature of LVMPD Defendants’ filings—a 48-page motion from LVMPD 23 with 27 exhibits and a separate 21-page motion from Defendants Vanessa and Don’te Mitchell 24 with 30 non-identical exhibits—necessitates additional time to prepare comprehensive responses 25 addressing the substantial arguments and evidence presented. 26 The parties stipulate and agree that this extension will not create an unnecessary delay to 27 the resolution of this case. The proposed extension will ensure adequate time for thorough 1 || preparation of responses and replies, providing the Court with complete briefing necessary for 2 || ruling on the merits. 3 || DATED this 8th day of May, 2025 DATED this 8th day of May, 2025 5 By: /s/Peter Goldstein By: /s/Lyssa S. Anderson Peter Goldstein (SBN 6992) Lyssa S. Anderson (SBN 5781) 6 PETER GOLDSTEIN LAW CORP Kristopher J. Kalkowski (SBN 14892) 10161 Park Run Drive, Suite 150 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Suite 650 7 Las Vegas, Nevada 89145 Las Vegas, NV 89135 Attorneys for Plaintiff Attorneys for LVMPD Defendants 9 10 1] IT ISSO ORDERED. 12 8 12th 14 Dated this of May, 2025 15 pings UNITED STATES DIS'RRICT JUDGE
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Smith v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (Smith v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.