Peterson et al v. Miranda et al

Filing 301

ORDER Denying Defendants' 294 Motion to Bifurcate Trial. The parties shall file a Joint Proposed Pretrial Order within 30 days of entry of this Order. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 5/15/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

LINDA PETERSON; et. al,

10

Plaintiffs,

11

v.

12

KEVIN MIRANDA; et. al,

13

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:11-cv-01919-LRH-PAL
ORDER

14
15

Before the court is defendants the Clark County School District (“CCSD”), Filiberto Arroyo

16

(“Arroyo”), Brian Nebeker (“Nebeker”), Loren Johnson (“Johnson”), and Armando Quintanilla’s

17

(“Quintanilla”) (collectively “CCSD defendants”) motion to bifurcate trial. Doc. #294.1 Plaintiffs

18

Linda and Francis Peterson (“the Petersons”) filed an opposition (Doc. #295) which was joined by

19

defendant Kevin Miranda (Doc. #296). Defendants then filed a reply. Doc. #297.

20

I.

Facts and Procedural History2

21

This action arises from the tragic death of the Petersons’ daughter, Angela Peterson.

22

On November 28, 2009, non-party Rebecca Wamsley (“Wamsley”), a dispatcher for the

23

CCSD Police Department (“department”), hosted a holiday party at her home and invited members

24
25
26

1

2

Refers to the court’s docket entry number.

This action has an extensive factual and procedural history. For a more complete history of this action,
see the court’s various orders on summary judgment. Doc. ## 272, 278, 289, 293, 298.

1

of the department and their families. Defendant Tina Zuniga (“Zuniga”) attended the holiday party

2

with her daughter and her daughter’s eighteen (18) year old boyfriend, defendant Kevin Miranda

3

(“Miranda”). Despite being underage, Miranda drank alcohol provided at the party. Miranda then

4

left the party intoxicated, ran a red light, and crashed his parents’ truck into the vehicle driven by

5

Angela Peterson, killing her. Miranda subsequently pled guilty to a category B felony, and is

6

currently serving an eighty (80) month prison sentence.

7

On October 20, 2011, the Petersons filed a complaint for wrongful death against all

8

defendants. Doc. #1, Exhibit 1. On June 5, 2013, the Petersons filed a second amended complaint

9

against defendants alleging thirteen causes of action: (1) negligence against all defendants;

10

(2) negligence against Eric Miranda and Chary Alvarado Miranda (“Miranda’s parents”);

11

(3) violation of NRS § 41.440 against Miranda’s parents; (4) violation of NRS § 41.1305 against

12

defendants Zuniga, Cynthia Ruelas, Mark W. Robbins, and Roberto Morales; (5) constitutional

13

violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against CCSD and all CCSD employee defendants;

14

(6) intentional infliction of emotional distress against all defendants; (7) negligent infliction of

15

emotional distress against all defendants; (8) negligent hiring, retention, and supervision against

16

CCSD; (9) ratification against CCSD; (10) respondent superior against CCSD; (11) punitive

17

damages against CCSD and all CCSD employee defendants; (12) punitive damages against

18

Miranda; and (13) civil conspiracy against CCSD and all CCSD employee defendants. See

19

Doc. #172.

20

After a series of motions for summary judgment and motion for reconsideration, CCSD

21

defendants filed the present motion to bifurcate trial. Doc. #294.

22

II.

23

Discussion
In their motion, CCSD defendants seek to bifurcate the upcoming trial into two separate

24

parts: a jury trial on all claims arising after the death of Angela Peterson followed by a separate jury

25

trial on all claims arising from the Wamsley holiday party. See Doc. #294.

26

///
2

1

Under Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court may bifurcate a trial for the

2

convenience of the court and the parties, to avoid prejudice, and to expedite and economize the trial

3

process. FED. R. CIV. P. 42(b). Under Rule 42(b), a district court has broad discretion to bifurcate as

4

part of its trial management. Gardco Mfg., Inc. v. Herst Lighting, 820 F.2d 1209, 1212 (Fed. Cir.

5

1987).

6

Here, the court finds that bifurcating the jury trial is not warranted. First, the court finds that

7

bifurcation will not expedite nor economize the trial. In fact, bifurcation in this action creates a

8

situation in which two defendants, defendants Tina Zuniga and Cynthia Ruelas, would be required

9

to participate in two separate trials arising from the death of Angela Peterson. Further, the court

10

finds that the facts of the holiday party and the actions of CCSD defendants after the holiday party

11

are inextricably intertwined. This factual overlap would require the duplication of large portions of

12

evidence, including witness testimony. Moreover, bifurcation would prevent plaintiffs from

13

presenting their entire case to a single jury at one time and would instead force them to unnaturally

14

dissect their claims against various defendants and try this matter piecemeal. Finally, CCSD

15

defendants have failed to establish any actual prejudice that would result from a unified trial.

16

Therefore, the court shall deny CCSD defendants’ motion for bifurcation.

17
18
19
20
21

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendants’ motion to bifurcate trial (Doc. #294) is
DENIED.
IT IS FURTHERED ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint proposed pre-trial order
within thirty (30) days of entry of this order.

22

IT IS SO ORDERED.

23

DATED this 15th day of May, 2015.

24

__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
3