Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas, No. 2:2017cv02916 - Document 112 (D. Nev. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER Granting 111 Stipulation for Extension of Time. Re: 95 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, 88 Motion for Summary Judgment. Replies due by 8/9/2021. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/4/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas Doc. 112 Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 MELANIE A. HILL, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 8796 MELANIE HILL LAW PLLC 1925 Village Center Circle, Suite 150 Las Vegas, NV 89134 Tel: (702) 362-8500 Fax: (702) 362-8505 Email: Melanie@MelanieHillLaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff Pamela Dittmar 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 ***** 11 12 PAMELA DITTMAR, Plaintiff, 13 14 15 16 17 Case No. 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO EXTEND THE PARTIES’ REPLY DEADLINES FOR ONE DAY v. CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, a municipal corporation, (Ninth Request) [ECF No. 111] Defendant. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NOW COMES the Plaintiff, Pamela Dittmar, by and through her attorneys, Melanie A. Hill and Melanie Hill Law PLLC, and Defendant, City of North Las Vegas, by and through its attorneys, R. Todd Creer, Kaitlin H. Paxton, and Kamer Zucker Abbott, who hereby stipulate that the deadline for Plaintiff to file her response to the currently pending dispositive motion be extended from the current deadline of August 2, 2021 up to an including August 9, 2021. This is the ninth request for an extension of the dispositive motion deadline. The first request was by stipulation to extend the dispositive motion deadline thirty (30) days from the extended discovery cutoff deadline to complete the remaining two depositions. The second request was by motion due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s ongoing illness with Covid-19 symptoms. The third request was by stipulation due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s immediate family member’s emergency hospitalization for –1– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 2 of 6 1 nearly one week. The fourth request was by stipulation due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s significant 2 injuries from two separate accidents. The fifth request was by stipulation due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s 3 significant injuries from two separate accidents to allow her to have additional diagnostic tests, pain 4 management, and give her additional time from her original estimate on a requested extension to 5 treat and heal. The sixth request was made by stipulation to allow Plaintiff’s counsel additional time 6 to obtain assistance with the formatting and preparation of the response exhibits and citations to the 7 same in the response because her paralegal had a medical procedure last Friday and could not assist 8 counsel due to a medical procedure. This seventh request was by stipulation due to an acute gastro 9 illness that Plaintiff’s counsel was suffering from. This eighth request was by stipulation due to 10 Plaintiff’s counsel’s continued injuries that have gotten worse and now require Plaintiff’s counsel to 11 get a wrist injection and two nerve blocks and two nerve ablations. 12 numerous doctors’ appointments and physical therapy visits occurred last week and the nerve 13 procedures are scheduled to occur next week on July 27 and 29 preventing counsel from working 14 those days due to the medication and cause her difficulty working this week due to the increased 15 pain. It was also due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s prescheduled vacation for the Fourth of July holiday 16 and the following week and a half that coincided with the reply deadline. This ninth request is by 17 stipulation due Plainitff’s counsel’s continued pain making it difficult for her to sit for more than 2 18 hours at a time to work and because she had to cancel her nerve procedures. Counsel for Plaintiff 19 was supposed to have nerve procedures on her back last week that she was unable to have due to the 20 Covid-19 pandemic because they were to take place in a surgery center setting and the numbers are 21 so high that counsel did not think it was safe to do so. As a result, counsel for plaintiff is dealing 22 with back and neck pain that make it difficult for her to work for more than two hours at a time. The 23 additional time will allow her to complete the reply and accommodate her pain and the limited time 24 she can work each day. This request is also made to accommodate a technical issue creating video 25 clips from a deposition and counsel for Plaintiff needs to re-request the video from the court 26 reporting company. Given the dispositive nature of this motion, counsel requested, and the parties 27 stipulated, to this additional extension due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s injuries and pain and this technical The wrist injection and 28 –2– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 3 of 6 1 issue so that Ms. Dittmar is not prejudiced in her case due to counsel’s injuries from a fall and rear 2 end car accident in April. 3 As soon as it became apparent to counsel for Plaintiff that additional time was necessary to 4 finalize the reply, counsel sent an email to counsel for Defendant this morning requesting this 5 additional extension. 6 In support of this Stipulation and Order, the parties state as follows: 7 1. The current deadline to file replies to the currently pending dispositive motions is 8 August 2, 2021. When the parties first entered into a stipulation to extend the dispositive motion 9 deadline, it was to extend the dispositive motion deadline to thirty (30) days from the extended 10 discovery cutoff deadline to complete the remaining two depositions. When the parties next 11 entered into a stipulation to extend the dispositive motion deadline, it was to extend the dispositive 12 motion deadline thirty (30) days due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s ongoing illness with Covid-19 13 symptoms. The parties then entered into a stipulation for an additional seven (7) days due to 14 Plaintiff’s counsel’s family member’s health emergency. The parties then stipulated to extend the 15 dispositive motion deadline due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s significant injuries from two separate 16 accidents to allow Plaintiff’s counsel to have additional diagnostic tests, pain management, and 17 additional time from her original estimate on a requested extension to treat and heal. The parties 18 again stipulated to an extension to allow Plaintiff’s counsel addition time to prepare seek assistance 19 in preparing her exhibits that she needs to cite to in the response and declarations. Due to Plaintiff’s 20 counsel’s continued pain from two separate accidents, she was also not able to sit and work for long 21 periods of time and the exhibit formatting and preparation, in addition to the response preparation is 22 very time consuming and her pain has increased due to time spent sitting and working and standing 23 and working at her standing desk for lengthy periods of time. As a result of needing to take lengthy 24 breaks to reduce the pain, counsel for Plaintiff sought additional time and assistance to complete the 25 response and exhibits necessitating the final two stipulations to extend the response and reply 26 deadlines. 27 28 2. The parties stipulated to extend the reply deadline after Plaintiff’s counsel’s wrist injection occurred and her nerve block, and nerve ablations were recommended and scheduled. –3– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 4 of 6 1 Plaintiff’s counsel further informed counsel for Defendant that she had a wrist injection and 2 numerous doctors’ appointments, including physical therapy visits, last week necessitating this 3 extension request in addition to a prescheduled vacation over the fourth of July holiday. The nerve 4 procedures were scheduled to occur last week on July 27 and 29, however counsel had to cancel 5 them due to the Covid numbers increasing substantially because counsel did not think it was safe to 6 spend two days in a surgery center. As a result, counsel for plaintiff is dealing with back and neck 7 pain that make it difficult for her to work for more than two hours at a time. The additional time will 8 allow her to complete the reply and accommodate her pain and the limited time she can work each 9 day. This request is also made to accommodate a technical issue creating video clips from a 10 deposition and counsel for Plaintiff needs to re-request the video from the court reporting company. 11 Given the dispositive nature of this motion, counsel requested, and the parties stipulated, to this 12 additional extension due to Plaintiff’s counsel’s injuries and pain so that Ms. Dittmar is not 13 prejudiced in her case due to counsel’s injuries from a fall and rear end car accident in April. 14 Additionally, due to Plaintiff’s continued pain from two separate accidents, she is also not able to sit 15 and work for long periods of time. 3. 16 Through this Stipulation, and to avoid prejudice to Defendant in preparing and filing 17 its briefs on the same day, this stipulation extends the deadline for both parties to file their replies. 18 The new reply deadline the parties have stipulated to is August 9, 2021. 4. 19 Through this Stipulation, the parties request that the Court extend the deadline to file 20 Plaintiff’s reply in support of their motion for partial summary judgement and Defendant’s reply in 21 support of their motion for summary judgment until August 9, 2021. No other deadlines are being 22 extended by this motion, such as the deadline for discovery and to file a motion to compel written 23 discovery. 5. 24 Courts in the District of Nevada have routinely held extensions of deadlines for 25 illness and the “practicalities of life” establish good cause for the requested extension. In Morales v. 26 McDaniel, District of Nevada Magistrate Judge Baldwin found good cause to grant an extension and 27 /// 28 /// –4– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 5 of 6 1 held as follows: 2 “The proper procedure, when additional time for any purpose is needed, is to present to the Court a timely request for an extension before the time fixed has expired (i.e., a request presented before the time then fixed for the purpose in question has expired).” Canup v. Miss. Valley Barge Line Co., 31 F.R.D. 282, 283 (D. Pa. 1962). The Canup Court explained that “the practicalities of life” (such as an attorney’s “conflicting professional engagements” or personal commitments such as vacations, family activities, illnesses, or death) often necessitate an enlargement of time to comply with a court deadline. Id. Extensions of time “usually are granted upon a showing of good cause, if timely made.” Creedon v. Taubman, 8 F.R.D. 268, 269 (D. Ohio 1947). The good cause standard considers a party’s diligence in seeking the continuance or extension. Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 3 4 5 6 7 8 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173103 (D. Nev. Oct. 3, 2019). 9 6. This Stipulation to extend Plaintiff’s dispositive motion response deadline is 10 brought in good faith, with a showing of good cause, and is not sought for any improper 11 purpose or other purpose of delay, but to allow counsel for the Plaintiff additional time to finalize 12 and file her reply due to her pain from her injuries and to accommodate the technical issue with one 13 of the deposition videos that counsel needs to create video clips from. This extension will allow 14 counsel for Plaintiff the additional time necessary to do so in light of her medical issues, pain, and 15 technical issue necessitating requesting another copy a the deposition video from the court reporter. 16 7. In accordance with LR 26-3, a stipulation to extend any date set by the discovery 17 plan, scheduling order, or other order must, in addition to satisfying the requirements of LR IA 6-1, 18 be supported by a showing of good cause for the extension. Local R. 26-3. Plaintiff submits that 19 good cause exists under the totality of the circumstances provided herein due to her medical issues, 20 ongoing pain, and technical issue necessitating requesting another copy a the deposition video from 21 the court reporter until August 9, 2021. 22 23 24 25 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// –5– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES Case 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW Document 112 Filed 08/04/21 Page 6 of 6 1 WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request by this Stipulation that the Court extend 2 the deadline for the parties to file their replies to the pending dispositive motion from the current 3 deadline of August 2, 2021 up to and including August 9, 2021. 4 DATED this 2nd day of August, 2021. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MELANIE HILL LAW PLLC By: KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT /s/ Melanie A. Hill Melanie A. Hill, Esq. (NV Bar No. 8796) 1925 Village Center Circle, Ste. 150 Las Vegas, Nevada 89134 Telephone: (702) 362-8500 Facsimile: (702) 362-8505 Melanie@MelanieHillLaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Pamela Dittmar By: 12 /s/ Kaitlin H. Paxton R. Todd Creer (NV Bar No. 10016) Kaitlin H. Paxton (NV Bar No. 13625) 3000 West Charleston Blvd., Suite 3 Las Vegas, Nevada 89102 Telephone: (702) 259-8640 Facsimile: (702) 259-8646 kpaxton@kzalaw.com Attorneys for Defendant City of North Las Vegas 13 14 15 16 17 18 Order The parties stipulate for a third time to extend the deadline for plaintiff Pamela Dittmar to file her reply in support of her summary-judgment motion to August 9, 2021. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties' stipulation to extend time [ECF No. 111] is GRANTED, however, given the excessive number of extensions that have been sought by plaintiff's counsel for the parties' summary-judgment briefs, NO FURTHER EXTENSION OF THIS DEADLINE WILL BE GRANTED. 19 20 21 22 23 ____________________________________ JENNIFER A. DORSEY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 24 Dated: August 4, 2021 25 26 27 28 –6– STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISPOSITIVE MOTION REPLY DEADLINES
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
