Opinion
3:73-cv-00127-MMD-CSD
12-15-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE Plaintiff-Intervernor, v. WALKER RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a corporation, et al., Defendants.
WOODBURN AND WEDGE By: Gordon H. DePaoli Nevada Bar No. 195 Attorneys for Walker River Irrigation District LAW OFFICES OF WES WILLIAMS, JR., P.C. Wes Williams, Jr., NSB 6864, MEYER, WALKER & WALKER, P.C., Alice E. Walker, Attorneys for Walker River Paiute Tribe U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Guss Guarino, Trial Attorney, Marisa J. Hazell, Trial Attorney Environment and Natural Resources Div., David L. Negri Trial Attorney, Natural Resources Section c/o U.S. Attorney's Office Attorneys for United States of America BEST BEST & KRIEGER Roderick E. Walston, Attorney for Centennial Livestock and Lyon County Jerry Snyder, NSB 6830 Attorney for Lyon County OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA Nhu Q. Nguyen, NSB 7844 Attorneys for California State Agencies STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Anthony J. Walsh, NSB 14128 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Nevada Department of Wildlife THE COUNTY OF MONO (CA) Stacey Simon, County Counsel Emily Fox, Dep. County Counsel Attorneys for Mono County SIMONS HALL JOHNSTON PC Brad M. Johnston, NSB 8515 Attorneys for Desert Pearl Farms, Peri Family Ranch, LLC, Peri & Peri LLC, and Frade Ranches
WOODBURN AND WEDGE By: Gordon H. DePaoli Nevada Bar No. 195 Attorneys for Walker River Irrigation District
LAW OFFICES OF WES WILLIAMS, JR., P.C. Wes Williams, Jr., NSB 6864, MEYER, WALKER & WALKER, P.C., Alice E. Walker, Attorneys for Walker River Paiute Tribe
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Guss Guarino, Trial Attorney, Marisa J. Hazell, Trial Attorney Environment and Natural Resources Div., David L. Negri Trial Attorney, Natural Resources Section c/o U.S. Attorney's Office Attorneys for United States of America
BEST BEST & KRIEGER Roderick E. Walston, Attorney for Centennial Livestock and Lyon County Jerry Snyder, NSB 6830 Attorney for Lyon County
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CALIFORNIA Nhu Q. Nguyen, NSB 7844 Attorneys for California State Agencies
STATE OF NEVADA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Anthony J. Walsh, NSB 14128 Deputy Attorney General Attorneys for Nevada Department of Wildlife
THE COUNTY OF MONO (CA) Stacey Simon, County Counsel Emily Fox, Dep. County Counsel Attorneys for Mono County
SIMONS HALL JOHNSTON PC Brad M. Johnston, NSB 8515 Attorneys for Desert Pearl Farms, Peri Family Ranch, LLC, Peri & Peri LLC, and Frade Ranches
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING THE STAY REGARDING DISCOVERY AND MOTION SCHEDULE
1. On June 23, 2022, the Plaintiffs and Principal Defendants (“Parties”) requested a 90-day stay of the Scheduling Order and obligations outlined therein to give the Parties the opportunity to resolve the Tribe's outstanding water right claims by agreement. Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Staying the Order Regarding Discovery and Motion Schedule (ECF No. 2701) (“Stipulation”).
Order Regarding Discovery and Motion Schedule and Procedure (ECF No. 2611).
2. On June 24, 2022 the Court granted the Parties request. Order Staying the Order Regarding Discovery and Motion Schedule (ECF No. 2702) (“Stay Order”).
3. Based upon the progress made by the Parties during that first 90-day Stay, on September 15, 2022, the Parties requested a second 90-day Stay (ECF 2706)(“Second Stay Order”).
4. In the Second Stay Order, the Court directed the Parties as follows: “Within seven (7) days before the expiration of any stay granted the Parties will inform the Court either that additional time is needed to achieve a settlement agreement or that settlement will not be possible. In either case, the Parties will seek additional relief from the Court accordingly as needed and as contemplated by paragraphs 14 and 16 of the Scheduling Order.” Second Stay Order at 3.
5. Since September 16, 2022, the Plaintiffs and Principal Defendants Walker River Irrigation District and Nevada Department of Wildlife (the “Negotiating Parties”) have substantively and productively engaged in discussions, consultations, correspondence and meetings to pursue an agreement among the Parties that would resolve the Tribe's outstanding water right claims. This activity was consistent with the extensive internal and external consultation previously contemplated by the Parties and the Court. See Stipulation at 3 ¶11.
6. Although the Parties have been unable to yet achieve a final agreement, the Negotiating Parties have made substantial progress on such an Agreement which has included exchanges of and revisions to a written agreement.
7. Most recently, the Negotiating Parties have met in person and believe that additional meetings, discussions, consultations, and correspondence would be beneficial and productive to developing a final agreement that would resolve the Tribe's outstanding water right claims.
8. Accordingly, the Negotiating Parties believe that a third, 90-day stay of the Scheduling Order is justified and would be beneficial and productive to developing a final agreement that would resolve the Tribe's outstanding water right claims.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the Second Stay Order, the Parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1. The Scheduling Order and obligations outlined therein should be stayed for a third 90-day period to give the Parties the opportunity to resolve the Tribe's outstanding water right claims by agreement.
2. Within seven (7) days before the expiration of any stay granted the Parties will inform the Court either that additional time is needed to achieve a settlement agreement or that settlement will not be possible. In either case, the Parties will seek additional relief from the Court accordingly as needed and as contemplated by paragraphs 14 and 16 of the Scheduling Order.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.