Priestley v. Shields et al, No. 2:2021cv01657 - Document 28 (D. Nev. 2023)
Court Description: ORDER Granting nunc pro tunc 27 Stipulation re: Rule 35 Exam with corrections. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 2/13/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TRW)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Priestley v. Shields et al Doc. 28 Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 RYAN L. DENNETT, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 005617 rdennett@dennettwinspear.com BRENT D. QUIST, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 009157 bquist@dennettwinspear.com DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP 3301 N. Buffalo Drive, Suite 195 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129 Telephone: (702) 839-1100 Facsimile: (702) 839-1113 Co-counsel for Defendants, Jon Shields and Misty Shields 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 10 11 GLENDA MARIE PRIESTLEY, an individual, Plaintiff, 12 13 14 15 Case No: 2:21-CV-01657-JCM-DJA vs. JON SHIELDS, an individual; MISTY SHIELDS, an individual; DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and ROE BUSINESS ENTITIES 1 through 20, inclusive, 16 Defendants. 17 18 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO CONDUCT A FED.R.CIV.P. 35 EXAM OF PLAINTIFF GLENDA MARIE PRIESTLEY 19 Plaintiff GLENDA MARIE PRIESTLEY, by and through his counsel of record, 20 BERTOLDO BAKER CARTER & SMITH, and JON and MISTY SHIELDS, by and through their 21 counsel of record, DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP, hereby stipulate to the Fed.R.Civ.P. 35(a) 22 examination of Plaintiff GLENDA MARIE PRIESTLEY. 23 1. The Rule 35 examination of Plaintiff is currently scheduled to take place with Dr. 24 John Herr at 1701 N. Green Valley Parkway, Suite 4C, Henderson, Nevada 89074. It will take 25 place February 8, 2023, at 9:45 a.m. 26 ... 27 ... 28 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 2 of 6 1 2. All paperwork to be completed by Plaintiff shall be provided to Plaintiff’s counsel 2 at least ten (10) days prior to the examination for Plaintiff’s counsel to review and for Plaintiff to 3 complete. Plaintiff will bring the completed paperwork to the examination, which will help to 4 ensure timely completion of the examination. 5 6 3. Defendants’ representatives shall be responsible for gathering films unless already in Plaintiff’s possession. 7 4. Plaintiff may audio record the examination. Dr. Herr may also audio record the 8 examination. Plaintiff’s audio recording and Dr. Herr’s audio recording shall be disclosed within 9 fourteen (14) days of the examination. 10 11 5. Defense shall not have anyone other than the physician and his staff attend the examination. 12 6. Plaintiff may have an observer attend the examination. Plaintiff shall identify to the 13 defense, within ten (10) days prior to the examination, the name of the observer and relationship 14 to the Plaintiff. The observer will not be Plaintiff’s attorney or an employee of Plaintiff’s attorney’s 15 office. 16 7. The observer may not interfere or obstruct the examination in any way. If Dr. Herr 17 believes the observer is interfering or obstructing with the examination in any way, Dr. Herr may 18 pause the examination and contact defense counsel. Counsel will meet and confer regarding the 19 issue. If, after the observer is informed not to interfere or obstruct with the examination, the 20 observer continues to interfere or obstruct the examination then Dr. Herr may terminate the 21 examination. If that occurs, Defendants shall have the right to have Dr. Herr resume the Rule 35 22 exam at another date/time, with another observer present. Plaintiff will be responsible to pay Dr. 23 Herr’s costs/expense associated with this second, continued examination. 24 8. 25 ... 26 ... 27 ... 28 ... Video-recording of the examination will not be permitted. 2 Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 3 of 6 1 9. It is expected that the exam will start within thirty (30) minutes of the scheduled 2 starting time and Plaintiff’s time in the physician’s office will not exceed ninety (90) minutes from 3 the scheduled start time. If either of these time frames are exceeded, Plaintiff will call his counsel 4 and Plaintiff’s counsel will contact Defendants’ counsel and attempt to rectify the situation. If the 5 parties are unable to rectify the situation at that time, the parties will work together to reschedule 6 the Rule 35 examination at a mutually convenient time for Plaintiff and the doctor. Plaintiff will not 7 be responsible for any costs which may be incurred if the Rule 35 Exam must be rescheduled 8 due to the time limits set forth herein being exceeded. 9 10. If Plaintiff fails to appear for the Rule 35 Exam, Plaintiff will not be required to pay 10 the costs associated with Plaintiff’s failure to appear if the parties determine the failure to appear 11 was due to an emergency. If the parties are unable to agree as to whether the reason for 12 Plaintiff’s failure to attend the exam constituted an emergency, the parties agree to submit the 13 issue to the Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff will not be responsible to pay the costs associated with 14 his failure to appear at the exam if the Magistrate Judge determines an emergency situation was 15 the cause for Plaintiff’s failure to appear at the exam. Otherwise, Plaintiff will be required to pay 16 the costs associated with his failure to appear at the exam. 17 18 11. health care providers and retained experts. 19 20 Dr. Herr will not engage in contact with Plaintiff’s witnesses including treating 12. The physical examination shall be limited to the parts of the body which bears a reasonable relationship to the body parts that Plaintiff has placed in controversy. 21 13. No physically painful or intrusive procedures may be utilized during the 22 examination, nor shall Plaintiff be required to disrobe other than what is absolutely necessary to 23 assist the examiner. 24 14. No x-rays, radiographs or other diagnostic tests, intrusive or painful procedures, 25 or treatment may be obtained during the examination without Plaintiff’s counsel’s prior approval. 26 ... 27 ... 28 ... 3 Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 4 of 6 1 15. Defendants will produce a copy of Dr. Herr’s Rule 35 exam report by the deadline 2 for initial expert disclosures established by the modified Scheduling Order. 3 DATED this 9th day of February, 2023. DATED this 9th day of February, 2023 DENNETT WINSPEAR, LLP BERTOLDO BAKER CARTER & SMITH By /s/ Ryan L. Dennett____ RYAN L. DENNETT, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 005617 BRENT D. QUIST, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 009157 3301 N. Buffalo Drive, Suite 195 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129 Attorneys for Defendants By__/s/ Paul R.M. Cullen PAUL R. M. CULLEN, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 012355 7408 w. Sahara Avenue Las Vegas, Nevada 89117 Attorneys for Plaintiff 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ORDER 13 14 15 16 Upon stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, the stipulation is hereby granted tunc. adoptednunc and pro made an Order of the Court. 13th February DATED this _______ day of _____________________, 2023. 17 18 ______________________________________ 19 MAGISTRATE JUDGE DANIEL J. ALBREGTS UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 5 of 6 Theresa Amendola From: Sent: To: Subject: Paul Cullen <Paul@nvlegaljustice.com> Thursday, February 9, 2023 4:15 PM Theresa Amendola RE: Priestly v Shields- New Stip You may a x my signature. Paul R.M. Cullen, Esq. BERTOLDO CARTER SMITH & CULLEN 7408 W. Sahara Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 89117 Telephone 702.800.0000 | Fax 702.228.2333 email: paul@nvlegaljustice.com *This email and any attachments hereto are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender at (702) 800-0000 and delete all copies from your system. It is not the intent of the sender to solicit any person or business. Please note that any opinions in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Bertoldo Carter Smith & Cullen. Any views or opinions are not to be considered legal advice. Should you need legal advice in the state of Nevada, please contact Bertoldo Carter Smith & Cullen. All attorneys at Bertoldo Carter Smith & Cullen are licensed in Nevada. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage or loss caused by any virus inadvertently transmitted by this email* From: Theresa Amendola <tamendola@dennettwinspear.com> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2023 2:38 PM To: Paul Cullen <Paul@nvlegaljustice.com> Subject: Priestly v Shields- New Stip ** Notice, this email is from an External Source. Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments ** Mr. Cullen: 1 Case 2:21-cv-01657-JCM-DJA Document 28 27 Filed 02/13/23 02/09/23 Page 6 of 6 As you are aware, the Court denied the S p without Prejudice. Brent corrected the errors noted in the Order and I am a aching the same for your review before e- ling. Please let me know if it can be led with your e-signature. Thank you. Theresa Theresa Amendola Assistant to Ryan L. Dennett, Esq. Jennifer Insley Micheri, Esq. Meredith L. Holmes, Esq. Direct dial: 702-932-2625 My normal working hours are Monday through Thursday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 3301 North Buffalo Drive, Suite 195 Las Vegas, Nevada 89129 702.839.1100 voice – extension 810 702.839.1113 fax CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: INFORMATION IN THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL USE OF THE RECIPIENT(S) NAMED ABOVE. This message may be an Attorney-Client communication, or may be an Attorney Work Product, and is therefore privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by return email, delete the message and return any hard copy printouts to the address above. Thank you. 2
]]>
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.
