Latelle v. Autozoners LLC et al
Filing
72
ORDER that Plaintiff George J. Latelle, Jr.s Countermotion to Stay Action 57 is granted in part and denied in part. All discovery in this matter is stayed until a ruling on the pending summary judgment is entered. Defendants Joint Motion to Exten d Discovery by 90 Days 67 is denied as moot. The parties shall file a joint status report within five (5) days after a decision on the pending summary judgment is entered identifying what discovery, if any, remains. Signed by Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman on 11/2/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
GEORGE LATELLE, JR.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
AUTOZONERS, LLC, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
Case No. 2:11-cv-00591-LDG-CWH
ORDER
12
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff George J. Latelle, Jr.’s Countermotion to Stay
13
Action (#57), filed October 12, 2011; Defendants’ Response (#66), filed October 25, 2011;
14
Interested Party Yvette Weinstein’s Opposition (#70), filed October 25, 2011; and the parties’ Joint
15
Motion to Extend Discovery by 90 Days (#67), filed October 25, 2011.
16
In cursory fashion, Plaintiff requests that the Court stay this matter in its entirety until the
17
Bankruptcy Court rules on several of Plaintiff’s claimed exemptions in its bankruptcy filing. See
18
Pl.’s Mot. (#57). Defendants Autozoners, LLC and Amy Nagle agree that discovery should be
19
stayed but object to any stay that would affect a ruling on the pending summary judgment in this
20
matter. Defendants along with interested party Yvette Weinsten have also filed a joint motion to
21
extend discovery by 90 days “so that they do not have to undertake discovery until after this Court
22
rules on the pending summary judgment motion.” See Joint Mot. (#67) at ¶ 4.
23
Magistrate Judge Leen previously granted Defendant Autozoners, LLC’s protective order
24
(#29) requesting that it not be required to respond to multiple written discovery requests
25
propounded by Plaintiff George Latelle until 14 days after resolution of the pending summary
26
judgment. See Order (#42). Judge Leen specifically noted that Judge George, the assigned district
27
judge in this case, had previously granted summary judgment to an employer on the ground of
28
judicial estoppel in virtually identical circumstances. Id. This protective order remains in effect.
1
Nevertheless, it appears that, although the parties agree that the stay is appropriate, they
2
disagree on its actual scope or whether its scope should be expanded. Plaintiff requests that the
3
entire action, including any decision on the pending summary judgment, be stayed until the
4
Bankruptcy Court rules on certain exemption issues currently pending before it. Defendants
5
request that all discovery be stayed until after a ruling on the pending summary judgment, but
6
oppose any stay that would preclude a decision on the pending summary judgment. After review,
7
the Court finds that Plaintiff has not made the type of showing necessary to warrant a stay of this
8
matter in its entirety. However, to the extent it is not clear from the prior protective order (#29),
9
the Court finds that there is good cause to stay all discovery in this matter until a ruling on the
10
pending summary judgment (#27) is entered. As a result of this stay, the parties request for an
11
extension of discovery deadlines is moot.
12
Based on the foregoing and good cause appearing therefore,
13
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff George J. Latelle, Jr.’s Countermotion to Stay
14
Action (#57) is granted in part and denied in part. All discovery in this matter is stayed until a
15
ruling on the pending summary judgment is entered.
16
17
18
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Joint Motion to Extend Discovery by 90
Days (#67) is denied as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint status report within five (5)
19
days after a decision on the pending summary judgment is entered identifying what discovery, if
20
any, remains.
21
DATED this 2nd day of November, 2011.
22
23
24
______________________________________
C.W. Hoffman, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge
25
26
27
28
2
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?