From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arlitz v. GEICO Cas. Co.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Oct 16, 2023
2:19-cv-00743-CDS-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 16, 2023)

Opinion

2:19-cv-00743-CDS-DJA

10-16-2023

KELSY ARLITZ, individually; GARY ARLITZ, as general guardian of ward KELSY ARLITZ; KARIE ARLITZ, as general guardian of ward KELSY ARLITZ, Plaintiffs v. GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY; DOES 1 through 100 and ROE CORPORATIONS 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants

Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP Caiy B. Lerman California Bai' No. 54937 (admitted pro hac vice) Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP Jacob Max Rosen McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP James P. Wagoner California Bar No. 58553 (admitted pro hac vice) Jonathan W. Carlson Attorneys for GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY PRINCE LAW GROUP Kevin T. Strong Dennis M. Prince Kevin T. Strong Attorneys for Plaintiff


Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP Caiy B. Lerman California Bai' No. 54937 (admitted pro hac vice) Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP Jacob Max Rosen McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP James P. Wagoner California Bar No. 58553 (admitted pro hac vice) Jonathan W. Carlson Attorneys for GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY

PRINCE LAW GROUP Kevin T. Strong Dennis M. Prince Kevin T. Strong Attorneys for Plaintiff

JOINT STATUS UPDATE, STIPULATION, AND ORDER ON ONGOING MEDIATION WITH NANCY M. SAITTA

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiffs KELSY ARLITZ, individually; GARY ARLITZ, as general guardian of ward KELSY ARLITZ, and KARIE ARLITZ, as general guardian of ward KELSY ARLITZ, through their- cormsel of record, PRINCE LAW GROUP, and Defendant GEICO CASUALTY COMPANY, through its counsel of record, McCORMICK, BARSTOW, SHEPPARD, WAYTE & CARRUTH LLP and MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON, LLP, as follows:

WHEREAS, on August 16, 2023, the parties stipulated that they attend a mediation before Retired Nevada Supreme Court Justice Nancy M. Saitta on October 2, 2023;

WHEREAS, in that stipulation, the parties stated that they would provide the Court a status update on the outcome of that settlement conference no later than October 16, 2023;

WHEREAS, the parties attended that mediation session and, although they did not reach a settlement, they agreed to attend a further mediation session with Justice Saitta;

WHEREAS, due to the parties' schedules and Justice Saitta's schedule, that mediation is now scheduled for the earliest possible date of December 11, 2023;

THEREFORE, the parties STIPULATE and respectfully REQUEST that the Court modify the current schedule for mediation and a mandatory settlement conference (Dkt. No. 205) as follows: The parties will provide the Court a status update on the outcome of the December 11 mediation no later than December 22, 2023. In the event that mediation is unsuccessful, the parties will request in that status report that the Com! set a date for a mandatory settlement conference with Judge Albregts. If that later conference, in turn, is unsuccessful, the parties will prepare a joint pretrial order within 30 days of the mandatoiy settlement conference with Judge Albregts.

Dated: October 13, 2023

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Arlitz v. GEICO Cas. Co.

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Oct 16, 2023
2:19-cv-00743-CDS-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 16, 2023)
Case details for

Arlitz v. GEICO Cas. Co.

Case Details

Full title:KELSY ARLITZ, individually; GARY ARLITZ, as general guardian of ward KELSY…

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Oct 16, 2023

Citations

2:19-cv-00743-CDS-DJA (D. Nev. Oct. 16, 2023)