Williams v. Emeritus Corporation

Filing 21

ORDER Granting 16 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 01/18/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

BARBARA WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,

10

13

ORDER
(Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment – dkt. no. 16)

v.

11
12

Case No. 2:11-cv-01497-MMD-NJK

EMERITUS CORPORATION, a foreign
corporation, doing business in Nevada as
LOYALTON OF LAS VEGAS, DOES I
through X and ROES I through X,

14
Defendants.
15
16

Before the Court is Defendant Emeritus Corporation’s motion for summary

17

judgment on the remaining negligence claim (dkt. no. 16). Plaintiff Barbara Williams’

18

response was due on December 21, 2012. She did not meet this deadline and has not

19

opposed the motion. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is granted.

20

I.

BACKGROUND

21

This case stems from the events that led to the tragic death of Plaintiff Barbara

22

Williams’ mother, Ardelle Ryder, while she was living at a nursing home operated by

23

Defendant Emeritus. The underlying facts are set out in more details in the Court’s prior

24

Order. (Dkt. no. 12.) After issuance of that Order, the only claim remaining is Williams’

25

negligence claim. Emeritus now moves for summary judgment on this claim.

26

II.

27
28

DISCUSSION
Summary judgment is appropriate for two reasons.

First, Williams failed to

respond to Emeritus’ Motion. Failure to file points and authorities in opposition to a

1

motion constitutes consent that the motion be granted. L.R. 7-2(d); see Abbott v. United

2

Venture Capital, Inc., 718 F. Supp. 828, 831 (D. Nev. 1989). Second, Emeritus’ Motion

3

should be granted on its merits. Emeritus argues that because Williams’ negligence

4

claim is premised on her mother’s wrongful death, her claim is time barred under NRS

5

11.190(4)(e). NRS 11.190(4)(e) provides that an action to recover damages resulting

6

from injuries or death of a person must be filed within 2 years. The Court agrees with

7

Emeritus that this action was filed more than two years after Ryder’s death and is

8

therefore time barred.

9

III.

10
11
12

CONCLUSION
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Emeritus’ motion for summary judgment (dkt. no.

16) is GRANTED.
The Clerk is directed to close this case.

13
14

DATED THIS 18th day of January 2013.

15
16
17

MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2