Evans v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Filing 94

ORDER granting Plaintiff's ECF No. 93 Motion to Vacate the 9/15/2017 Status Conference; directing Plaintiff to file a Notice of Decision within 7 days after the Nevada Supreme Court's ruling in Neville v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, Nev. Sup. Ct. No. 70696. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach on 9/12/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KR)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 Mark R. Thierman, Esq. (Nev. Bar No. 8285) mark@thiermanbuck.com Joshua D. Buck, Esq. (Nev. Bar No. 12187) josh@thiermanbuck.com Leah L. Jones, Esq. (Nev. Bar No. 13161) leah@thiermanbuck.com THIERMAN BUCK, LLP 7287 Lakeside Drive Reno, Nevada 89511 Telephone: (775) 284-1500 Fax: (775) 703-5027 11 David R. Markham, CA. Bar No. 071814 (pro hac vice) dmarkham@markham-law.com Janine R. Menhennet, CA. Bar No. 163501 (pro hac vice) jmenhennet@markham-law.com THE MARKHAM LAW FIRM 750 B Street, Suite 1950 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 399-3995 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 8 9 10 13 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 16 17 CHARDE EVANS, on behalf of herself, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, 18 19 20 21 22 23 v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive, Case No. 2:10-cv-01224-JCM-VCF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE SET FOR SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 Date: September 15, 2017 Time: 10:00 a.m. Judge: Magistrate Ferenbach Defendants. Judge: Hon. James C. Mahan 24 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE 1 Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court vacate the Status Conference scheduled 2 for September 15, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. because the Nevada Supreme Court has yet to issue its 3 decision in Neville v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, Nev. Sup. Ct. No. 4 70696. 5 Dated: September 11, 2017 Respectfully submitted: THIERMAN BUCK LLP 6 7 By: s/Joshua D. Buck Joshua D. Buck Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class 8 9 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 10 11 This Court granted Wal-Mart’s motion to stay the case pending the Nevada Supreme 12 Court’s decision in Neville v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, Nev. Sup. 13 Ct. No. 70696 (“Neville”). See ECF No. 91. 14 Counsel for Plaintiff is also counsel for Petitioner in the Neville action.1 The Nevada 15 Supreme Court heard oral argument on Neville’s Petition on July 17, 2017.2 As of the date of 16 filing this Motion, the Nevada Supreme Court has not issued its decision in Neville. Counsel 17 for Plaintiff expects a decision in Neville in the next few months. Upon issuance of a decision 18 in Neville, Counsel for Plaintiff will provide this court with a Notice of Decision no later than 19 seven (7) days after the issuance of the decision by the Nevada Supreme Court. 20 Dated: September 11, 2017 Respectfully submitted: THIERMAN BUCK LLP 21 22 By: s/Joshua D. Buck Joshua D. Buck Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 The Neville docket can be found at: http://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseView.do;jsessionid=02F070F991ECE4DADD45 07D238D0986D?csIID=39913 (last visited Aug. 16, 2017). 2 An audio transcript of the oral argument in Neville can be found at: http://nvcourts.gov/Supreme/Arguments/Recordings/NEVILLE,_JR__VS__DISTRICT_COU RT_(TERRIBLE_HERBST,_INC_)/ (last visited Aug. 16, 2017). PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate the September 15, 2017 Status Conference is GRANTED. 3 Plaintiff shall file a Notice of Decision within seven (7) days after the Nevada Supreme 4 Court’s ruling in Neville v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, Nev. Sup. Ct. 5 No. 70696. 6 7 8 9 10 IT IS SO ORDERED. September 12 DATED: ______________, 2017 _________________________________________ CAM FERENBACH UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?