Morgan v. State of Nevada, ex rel., et al, No. 2:2019cv02239 - Document 41 (D. Nev. 2021)
Court Description: ORDER granting 31 Stipulation; Discovery due by 3/11/2022. Motions due by 4/15/2022. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 5/13/2022. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 6/1/2021. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRS)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Morgan v. State of Nevada, ex rel., et al Doc. 41 Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 AARON D. FORD Nevada Attorney General SCOTT H. HUSBANDS Deputy Attorney General Nevada Bar No. 11398 GERALD L. TAN Deputy Attorney General Nevada Bar No. 13596 State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General 5420 Kietzke Lane, Suite 202 Reno, NV 89511 (775) 687-2121 (phone) (775) 688-1822 (fax) Email: shusbands@ag.nv.gov gtan@ag.nv.gov Attorneys for Defendants UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 11 12 JOSEPH MORGAN, an Individual 13 Plaintiff, 14 vs. 15 STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel. its DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY, STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel. its TAXICAB AUTHORITY; BRUCE BRESLOW, in his individual capacity; TERRY REYNOLDS, in his individual capacity; SCOTT WHITTEMORE, in his individual capacity; RUBEN AQUINO, in his individual capacity; GENEVIEVE HUDSON, in her individual capacity; RONALD GROGAN, in his individual capacity; CHARLES HARVEY, in his individual capacity; ANTOINE “CHRIS” RIVERS, in his individual capacity; CJ MANTHE, in her individual capacity; DOES I through X inclusive; and ROES XI through XX, inclusive, 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Case No.: 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES [THIRD 1 REQUEST] 23 Defendants. 24 25 Pursuant to LR 7-1 and LR 26-3, Plaintiff JOSEPH MORGAN (“Plaintiff”), by and 26 through his counsel of record, E. Brent Bryson, Esq. of the Law Offices of E. Brent Bryson, 27 1 28 The parties’ first request was denied due to addressing the incorrect standard for an extension of deadlines. ECF No. 23. Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 2 of 6 1 LTD., and Defendants BRUCE BRESLOW, TERRY REYNOLDS, SCOTT WHITTEMORE, 2 RUBEN AQUINO, GENEVIEVE HUDSON, RONALD GROGAN, CHARLES HARVEY, 3 ANTOINE “CHRIS” RIVERS AND C. J. MANTHE (each an “Individual Defendant” and 4 collectively the “Individual Defendants”), by and through their attorneys of record, AARON D. 5 FORD, Attorney General for the State of Nevada, SCOTT H. HUSBANDS, Deputy Attorney 6 General, and GERALD L. TAN, Deputy Attorney General hereby stipulate and request that this 7 court extend discovery deadlines and any unexpired deadlines in the above-captioned case for a 8 9 period of nine months. In support of this stipulation and request, the parties state as follows: I. DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE 1. On December 30, 2019, the Plaintiff filed his Complaint. ECF No. 1. 10 2. On March 17, 2020, the Defendants filed their Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint, ECF 11 No. 10, and Defendants’ Certificate of Interested Parties, ECF No. 11. 12 3. On March 18, 2020, this Court ordered an Early Neutral Evaluation Session (ENE) 13 for June 15, 2020. ECF No. 12. 14 4. On May 20, 2020, this Court ordered that ENE Confidential Statements are due by 15 June 8, 2020. ECF No. 14. 16 5. On May 29, 2020, the Defendants filed a Notice of Association of Counsel Deputy 17 Attorney General Gerald L. Tan. ECF. No. 15. 18 6. On June 2, 2020, the parties stipulated to a 14-day extension of time to exchange 19 FRCP 26 initial disclosures. ECF No. 16. 20 7. On June 3, 2020, this Court granted the parties’ request for a 14-day extension of 21 time to exchange FRCP 26 initial disclosures. ECF No. 17. 22 8. On June 12, 2020, the Plaintiff provided his initial disclosure of witnesses and 23 documents pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1). 24 9. On June 15, an ENE Session was held between the parties, but a settlement agreement was not reached. ECF No. 18. 25 10. On June 16, 2020, the Defendants provided their initial disclosure of witnesses and 26 documents pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1). 27 28 /// 2 Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 11. On July 17, 2020, the parties stipulated to a discovery plan and scheduling order. ECF No. 19. 12. On July 23, 2020, this Court granted the parties’ discovery plan and scheduling order. ECF No. 20. 5 13. On July 23, 2020, this Court provided Notice Pursuant to LR IB 2-2. ECF No. 21. 6 14. On July 23, 2020, this Court granted the parties’ discovery plan and scheduling 7 8 9 10 11 12 order. ECF No. 20. 15. On July 23, 2020, this Court provided Notice Pursuant to LR IB 2-2. ECF No. 21. 16. On October 29, 2020, Plaintiff timely served a set of interrogatories and document requests to each Defendant. These requests were served in compliance with the existing discovery cutoff in place at that time. The parties agreed to extend the deadline for Defendants to provide their discovery responses. Consistent with this agreement, Defendants served their responses on January 8, 2021. 13 17. On October 30, 2020, Plaintiff timely served deposition notices to each of the 14 15 16 17 18 19 Defendants. The parties have agreed to vacate these depositions in light of their November 2020 stipulation to extend the discovery deadlines and all other unexpired deadlines in this matter. The parties agreed to reschedule these depositions to future agreed-upon dates and times. The parties have not yet rescheduled these depositions as a result of Plaintiff’s counsel’s workload and issues involving the global COVID19 pandemic. 20 18. On November 12, 2020, pursuant to local rules, counsel for Mr. Morgan and the 21 Individual Defendants met and conferred telephonically regarding a number of issues 22 including discovery matters. That meet and confer resulted in the terms set forth in 23 the parties’ November 2020 stipulation. The Court entered an order approving the 24 terms of the parties’ stipulation on November 16, 2020. (ECF No. 29). 25 19. On May 4, 2021, the Court entered its order denying a motion to dismiss filed by 26 Defendants STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel. its DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND 27 INDUSTRY, STATE OF NEVADA, ex rel. its TAXICAB AUTHORITY (the 28 “Agency Defendants”). (ECF no. 30). As part of its order, the Court allowed 3 Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 4 of 6 1 Plaintiff 30 days to properly serve these defendants so that they could be made 2 proper parties to the litigation. 3 20. On the same day the Court entered the order referenced above, the undersigned 4 counsel met and conferred on a number of matters including discovery matters. 5 Counsel agreed that the parties needed additional time to conduct their remaining 6 discovery. Further, the parties agreed that the imminent addition of the Agency 7 Defendants would greatly expand the scope of discovery and that additional time 8 would be needed. Lastly, the parties expressed their hope that pandemic-related 9 concerns were lessening and that it might be possible to conduct in person 10 depositions if the deadlines in this matter were extended. Counsel agreed that in 11 person depositions were preferable to depositions being taken virtually. 12 13 II. WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED This request for an extension of all unexpired deadlines was initiated upon the mutual 14 interest of all parties. 15 Defendants have responded to limited written discovery. The parties anticipate the need to 16 conduct further extensive written discovery. There are a number of depositions of both lay and 17 expert witnesses that will need to be taken in addition to those depositions already noticed by 18 Plaintiff. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and orders of the Governor of the State of Nevada, 19 the parties’ progress on these matters has been slowed despite the best efforts of counsel. The 20 parties are hopeful that with an extension of the deadlines in this matter, that they may be able to 21 take depositions in person soon. The parties have exchanged initial disclosures and the Individual 22 Further, all undersigned counsel, and in particular, Plaintiff’s counsel, have had a number 23 of other matters involving lengthy hearings and trials. This has consumed a great deal of 24 counsel’s time in the last six months. These issues, and pandemic-related issues of remote work 25 and limited resources have greatly complicated the parties’ ability to conduct the extensive 26 discovery that is needed in this matter. Therefore, the parties submit that good cause exists to 27 extend all unexpired discovery deadlines, and it is respectfully requested that the deadlines in 28 this matter be continued. 4 Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 5 of 6 1 III. REMAINING DISCOVERY 2 1. The Plaintiff will likely serve additional written discovery requests. 3 2. Defendants need to serve written discovery requests and Defendants expect to serve 4 additional written discovery requests as discovery progresses. 5 3. The Plaintiff and Defendants need to take the depositions of relevant witnesses and 6 expert witnesses. 7 4. Although the Agency Defendants are not yet proper parties to this matter, their 8 inclusion in this matter is imminent. This will greatly expand the scope of discovery 9 such that a preemptive extension of the deadlines in this matter is prudent. 10 IV. 11 12 PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR COMPLETING REMAINING DISCOVERY Based on the good cause to extend the unexpired discovery deadlines in this case, the parties submit the following proposed discovery schedule: 13 14 Scheduled Event Current Deadline Proposed Deadline 16 Discovery Cut-Off Date June 11, 2021 March 11, 2022 17 Dispositive Motions January 13, 2021 April 15, 2022 18 Joint Pretrial Order February 12, 2021 May 13, 2022 (If dispositive motions are filed the deadline for filing the joint pretrial order will be suspended until 30 days after a decision on the dispositive motions or further court order). 15 19 20 21 22 23 This request for extensions of time are not sought for any improper purpose or other 24 purposes of delay. The COVID-19 pandemic has stalled the parties’ attempts to conduct 25 meaningful discovery in this matter. The parties have worked diligently at complying with the 26 deadlines that can be met, but good cause exists to extend the current discovery deadlines. 27 /// 28 /// 5 Case 2:19-cv-02239-KJD-DJA Document 31 Filed 05/20/21 Page 6 of 6 1 2 WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this court extend discovery dates as outlined in accordance with the table above. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT this 20th day of May, 2021. 3 4 5 6 7 8 By: /s/Scott H. Husbands By: /s/ E. Brent Bryson SCOTT H. HUSBANDS, ESQ. Deputy Attorney General Nevada Bar No. 11398 GERALD R. TAN Nevada Bar No. 13596 5420 Kietzke Lane, Suite 202 Reno, NV 89511 Attorney for Defendants E. BRENT BRYSON, ESQ. E. BRENT BRYSON, LTD. Nevada Bar No. 4933 3202 West Charleston Blvd. Las Vegas, NV 89102 Attorney for Plaintiff 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED .this __ day of May, 2021. 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 DATED: June 1, 2021 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6
]]>
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.
