Opinion
Case No.: 2:18-cv-00009-APG-BNW
04-20-2020
COLLEEN HARRINGTON, Plaintiff v. STATE OF NEVADA ex. rel. NEVADA SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION/COLLEGE OF SOUTHERN NEVADA, Defendant
Order Denying Motion for Summary Judgment
[ECF No. 49]
Defendant State of Nevada moved for summary judgment. In response, plaintiff Colleen Harrington, who was representing herself at that point, requested a continuance because her counsel had withdrawn. Harrington understood that, prior to her counsel withdrawing, the parties had agreed to extend discovery and other deadlines. No stipulation or order to extend the deadlines was entered, however. Her prior counsel also told her that the defendants had not responded to discovery requests. So Harrington requested the defendant be required to produce discovery responses. ECF No. 52. Magistrate Judge Weksler partially granted Harrington's request and recently reopened discovery and set a new deadline for dispositive motions. ECF No. 63.
Because Harrington is pro se, I liberally construe her response as one for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d). Given that she is no longer represented by counsel and that the defendant allegedly did not properly respond to discovery requests before moving for summary judgment, fairness and the preference for resolving cases on their merits dictate that she be permitted to conduct discovery before responding to the motion. I therefore deny the defendant's motion for summary judgment, without prejudice to refile it at a later date.
I THEREFORE ORDER that the defendant's motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 49) is DENIED without prejudice.
DATED this 20th day of April, 2020.
/s/_________
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE