From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dryden v. State

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jan 7, 2022
2:16-cv-01227-JAD-EJY (D. Nev. Jan. 7, 2022)

Opinion

2:16-cv-01227-JAD-EJY

01-07-2022

BRYAN DRYDEN, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEVADA, et al., Defendants.

AARON D. FORD Attorney General DAVID A. BAILEY, Bar No. 13661 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Defendant Ted Nielson Justin V. Alper (No. 12923C) Attorney for Plaintiff Bryan Dryden


AARON D. FORD

Attorney General

DAVID A. BAILEY, Bar No. 13661

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendant Ted Nielson

Justin V. Alper (No. 12923C)

Attorney for Plaintiff Bryan Dryden

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND THE CLOSE OF DISCOVERY AND THE DEADLINE TO FILE A PROPOSED JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER [SECOND REQUEST]

Plaintiff, Bryan Dryden, by and through counsel, Justin V. Alper, and Defendant, Ted Nielson, by and through counsel, Aaron D. Ford, Nevada Attorney General, and David A. Bailey, Deputy Attorney General, hereby stipulate and agree to extend the close of discovery 90 days to permit Plaintiff's newly appointed pro bono counsel to complete his investigation, take depositions, and propound additional discovery (if necessary).

The current deadline for discovery to close and for the parties to submit their Proposed Joint Pretrial Order is January 7, 2022. The parties stipulate to extend these deadlines 90 days until April 7, 2022, with all other discovery related deadlines likewise extended 90 days.

Good Cause for Extension of Deadline:

Plaintiff's counsel was appointed only on August 9, 2021, and this case has been in protracted litigation for years. The Court granted Plaintiff's request to reopen discovery and the parties stipulation to extend the deadline to file the Proposed Joint Pretrial Order. Plaintiff's counsel still needs additional time to investigate and conduct additional discovery. Also, Counsel for Plaintiff and Counsel for Defendant are working on scheduling depositions as well as working through discovery issues regarding documents produced by Defendant. Counsel for Plaintiff and Counsel for Defendant require additional time to negotiate Plaintiff's request for documents, and will endeavor to avoid seeking the Court's involvement. Counsel for Plaintiff has subpoenaed multiple third parties, but is still trying to locate witnesses.

The parties stipulate that this constitutes a good cause for the requested extension under LR IA 6-1, and, therefore, request the Court extend the following deadlines so that justice may be done:

Item

Current Deadline

New Deadline

Close of discovery

January 7, 2022

April 7, 2022

Submission of Proposed Joint Pretrial Order

January 7, 2022

April 7, 2022

Dispositive Motions due

February 7, 2022

May 8, 2022

Pretrial Order

March 9, 2022

June 7, 2022*

* Unless a dispositive motion is pending on that date thereby automatically extending the due date for the pre-trial order to 30 days after the pending dispositive motion is resolved.

DATED this 7th day of January 2022.

AARON D. FORD

Attorney General

David A. Bailey (No. 13661)

Deputy Attorney General

Attorneys for Defendant Ted Nielson

Justin V. Alper (No. 12923C)

Attorney for Plaintiff Bryan Dryden

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation and Order to Extend the Close of Discovery and the Deadline to File a Proposed Joint Pretrial Order (ECF No. 185) is DENIED because the parties misstate the deadline they seek to extend. The Court refers the parties to ECF No. 175 for the correct deadlines.


Summaries of

Dryden v. State

United States District Court, District of Nevada
Jan 7, 2022
2:16-cv-01227-JAD-EJY (D. Nev. Jan. 7, 2022)
Case details for

Dryden v. State

Case Details

Full title:BRYAN DRYDEN, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NEVADA, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Nevada

Date published: Jan 7, 2022

Citations

2:16-cv-01227-JAD-EJY (D. Nev. Jan. 7, 2022)