Opinion
2:21-cv-00541-JAD-EJY
01-31-2022
JONAS RAND, an individual Plaintiff, v. NORTH LAS VEGAS POLICE DEPARTMENT; OFFICER DARREN RIGSBY, individually and in his official capacity; OFFICER THATCHER, individually and in his official capacity; DOE OFFICERS I through X inclusive; and ROE OFFICERS XI through XX, inclusive, Defendants.
E. BRENT BRYSON, LTD. E. BRENT BRYSON, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff NOEL E. EIDSMORE, ESQ.Chief Deputy Attorney - Civil Attorney for Defendants
E. BRENT BRYSON, LTD. E. BRENT BRYSON, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff
NOEL E. EIDSMORE, ESQ.Chief Deputy Attorney - Civil Attorney for Defendants
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DISCOVERY DEADLINES [FIRST REQUEST]
Pursuant to LR 6-1 and LR 26-4, Plaintiff JONAS RAND (“Plaintiff), by and through his counsel of record, E. Brent Bryson, Esq. of the law offices of E. Brent Bryson, Ltd., and Defendants NORTH LAS VEGAS POLICE DEPARTMENT; OFFICER DARREN RIGSBY, individually and in his official capacity; OFFICER THATCHER, individually and in his official capacity (each an “Individual Defendant” and collectively the “Individual Defendants”), by and through their attorney of record, Noel E. Eidsmore, Esq., Chief Deputy Attorney, Civil Division, City of North Las Vegas, Nevada, hereby stipulate to and request that the Court enter the following proposed Joint Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order:
I. DISCOVERY COMPLETED TO DATE
1. On April 2, 2021, the Plaintiff filed his Complaint, ECF No. 1, and Plaintiff's Certificate of Interested Parties, ECF No. 3, was filed on April 6, 2021.
2. On June 1, 2021, the Defendants filed their Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 5, and Defendants' Certificate of Interested Parties, ECF No. 6.
3. On August 20, 2021, this Court issued a Minute Order in Chambers, ECF No. 7, that since the Parties failed to file a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order in accordance with United States District Court for the District of Nevada Local Rule 26-1, this Court Ordered the parties to file a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order within 14 days after the filing of this Court's August 20, 2021 Order.
As a result of the COVID pandemic and the Parties working from home, the Parties inadvertently failed to timely file a proposed discovery plan and scheduling order. The parties realized they failed to file a discovery plan and were working on a draft of the plan when the Court issued its own plan, ECF No. 8.
4. On September 21, 2021, Plaintiff provided his initial disclosure of witnesses and documents pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1).
5. On September 22, 2021, Defendants provided their initial disclosure of witnesses and documents, and Privilege Log, pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1).
6. On December 20, 2021, Plaintiff provided his disclosure of expert witness and report pursuant to FRCP 26.1(a)(1).
II. WHY REMAINING DISCOVERY HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED
While the parties have exchanged initial disclosures and Plaintiff has provided his expert witness disclosure and report, both parties must still conduct written discovery, provide rebuttal witnesses and conduct depositions. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and orders of the Governor of the State of Nevada, Orders from the Federal Bench District of Nevada, the Eighth Judicial District Court Administrative Orders and administrative orders from individual departments, the discovery process in this case has been slowed despite the best efforts of counsel. Additionally, Counsel for Defendants suffered a shoulder injury which has been ongoing and may require surgery. Last, Counsel for Plaintiff had to quarantine due to family members either testing positive or being exposed to persons who tested positive for COVID on multiple occasions. Mr. Bryson has had to constantly re-adjust his criminal defense trials as a result of the COVID pandemic and conduct criminal trials when the Defendants have invoked their speedy trial right. Thus, it is respectfully requested that the discovery in this matter be continued as a result of extraordinary circumstances.
III. REMAINING DISCOVERY
1. The Plaintiff and Defendants need to conduct written discovery requests and provide responses.
2. The Defendants must disclose their expert and/or rebuttal witness(es).
3. The Plaintiff and Defendants need to take the depositions of relevant witnesses and experts witnesses.
IV. EXTENSION OR MODIFICATION OF THE DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER
LR 26-4 governs modifications of extensions of the Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Any stipulation or motion must be made no later than twenty-one (21) days before the expiration of the subject deadline, and comply fully with LR 26-4. The current discovery cut-off deadline is February 16, 2022. This proposed stipulation is within the 21-day window.
The Parties respectfully request the Court grant modification of the discovery plan and scheduling order, ECF No. 8, by extending the current deadlines by approximately 120 days due to the following extraordinary unforeseen circumstances:
A. Defendants' Counsel likely requires surgery or rehabilitative therapy for his shoulder injury;
B. Defendants' Counsel's family have had to quarantine on multiple occasions;
C. On January 10, 2022, Eighth Judicial District Court Judge Tierra Jones, Department 10, emailed that due to the high numbers of transmission of COVID-19 in the Las Vegas Valley and the Courts, her Court is having extreme difficulty in completing long jury trials due to jurors, attorneys, court staff and witnesses contracting the virus and that trials lasting longer than five days be continued, and that the Court will re-evaluate the COVID situation on February 7, 2022;
D. On January 12, 2022, the Eighth Judicial District Court's Administrative Order 22-02 was filed and reads in pertinent part on Page 3, Lines 8-15:
“With the recent surge in COVID-19 cases in Clark County, it has become challenging for the Court to complete lengthy jury trials. The disruption of trial raises concerns about potential mistrial, increased costs to litigants, and unnecessary inconvenience to jurors. At the same time, the Court is aware of the importance of continuing to conduct trials when possible. Therefore, jury trials that are expected to take longer than a calendar week are paused for 30 days from the date this order is filed. Jury trial that can be completed within a calendar week should move forward under the COVID-19 Jury Trial Plan and AO 21-09.”
E. Together this has negatively impacted counsel's calendars for both the Plaintiff and the Defendants by delaying previously calendared jury trials, hearings and meetings. Plaintiff's counsel, Mr. E. Brent Bryson, is a sole practitioner without support of other counsel.
Therefore, the parties respectfully request that the modification of the scheduling order be granted.
The following is a list of the current discovery deadlines pursuant to this Court's Order, ECF No. 8, and the parties' proposed 120-day extension of deadlines:
Scheduled Event
Current Deadline
Proposed Deadline
Discovery Cut-Off Date
February 16, 2022
Thursday, June 16, 2022
Amend pleadings and add partiers
November 18, 2021
Friday, March 18, 2022
Initial Expert Disclosures Pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2)
December 20, 2021
Tuesday, April 19, 2022
Rebuttal Expert Disclosures Pursuant to FRCP 26(a)(2)
January 19, 2022
Thursday, May 19, 2022
Dispositive Motions
March 18, 2022
Monday, July 18, 2022
Joint Pretrial Order
April 18, 2022
Tuesday, August 16, 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).
This request for extensions of time are not sought for any improper purpose or other purposes of delay. The COVID-19 pandemic has stalled the parties' attempts to conduct meaningful discovery in this matter. Nonetheless, the parties have worked diligently at complying with the deadlines that can be met. This is the first request for an extension of time in this matter. The parties respectfully submit that the reasons set forth above constitute compelling reasons for the discovery extension.
WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this court extend discovery dates by 120 days as outlined in accordance with the table above in Section E.
IT IS SO ORDERED: